[excon]

I'm not now nor have I ever waged a "war on women". I'm waging a war against lies, infanticide and those who love it.

Hello again, Steve:

Yeah... I don't think even abortion providers "love" it. I don't think ANYBODY loves it. Yes, I'm painting ALL women with a BROAD brush. You seem to think that women seeking abortions, and those provided them, are looking for happy time. That couldn't be further from the truth.

Furthermore, it's THAT fundamental misunderstanding of women that fuels the war you're perpetrating on them...

Let's take the Kansas example... The proposed law there would allow the doctor to LIE to his patient IF telling the truth COULD lead to an abortion..

That's right, you wingers are FINE with telling a doctor he should LIE to his women patients... If THAT'S not a war on women, I don't know what is.

excon

[speechlesstx]

Dude, I've been married for almost 28 years. I will never understand women.

The point of this thread is an abortion activist acknowledged something that should have opened the door to an honest debate on abortion. Yet you still willfully ignore the clear and convincing evidence that I'm waging a war on lies and murdering babies, not women. I don't believe most women love abortion, I believe most women that have abortions come to regret the decision. I do believe Planned Parenthood loves abortion and I do believe all those misogynist liberal males like Bill Maher love abortion.

I wish more libs and feminists would be as honest as Jessica DelBalzo and Kirsten Powers then we might get somewhere. Instead you want to discuss obscure possibilities like your Kansas bill which curiously no one links to, quotes or references a bill number. I'm not for doctors lying to women about their test results, but I do think if your source and their source, the ACLU, are going to fear monger about it they can quote it, link to it or reference a bill number. Honest debate remember?

[excon]

but I do think if your source and their source, the ACLU, are going to fear monger about it they can quote it, link to it or reference a bill number. Honest debate remember?

Hello again, Steve:

Here's the link.

excon

[speechlesstx]

Thanks, I don't have time to read all 68 pages, can you point me to the relevant section?

[excon]

Thanks, I don't have time to read all 68 pages, can you point me to the relevant section?

Hello again, Steve:

I got a headache at page 18.

If it was just ONE left wing blogger, or ONE left wing website, I'd doubt whether it was in there, too. But, given the overwhelming reportage, I'm going to believe it..

I looked for shortcuts. Couldn't find any. Let me know what you find.

excon

[speechlesstx]

I get it, they are attempting to ban "wrongful birth" and "wrongful life" suits, something only 25 states recognize and some such as Idaho already ban. It's not a license to lie but all your sources certainly want us to believe it is. I don't believe doctors typically lie to their patients, do you? Are you that cynical?

P.S. It's on pages 3 and 4 if I recall, quite similar to the Idaho language from 2008.

§5-334(1): "A cause of action shall not arise, and damages shall not be awarded, on behalf of any person, based on the claim that but for the act or omission of another, a person would not have been permitted to have been born alive but would have been aborted."

[excon]

I get it, they are attempting to ban "wrongful birth" and "wrongful life" suits, something only 25 states recognize and some such as Idaho already ban.

Hello again, Steve:

Yeah, that ain't it. You only got to page 3?? Dude!

excon

[speechlesstx]

Hello again, Steve:

Yeah, that ain't it. You only got to page 3?? Dude!

Excon

I said I don't have time to read it, but you wouldn't so I did the next best thing, a search. The only word in the bill I could find in a document search remotely related to the word "lie" was "omission". I bet you I'm right which is why no one will quote or cite the relevant portion of the bill.

New Sec. 10. (a) No civil action may be commenced in any court for a claim of wrongful life or wrongful birth, and no damages may be recovered in any civil action for any physical condition of a minor that existed at the time of such minor’s birth if the damages sought arise out if a claim that a person’s action, or omission, contributed to such minor’s mother not obtaining an abortion.

(b) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to create any new cause of action, nor preclude any otherwise proper cause of action based on a claim that, but for a person’s wrongful action, or omission, the death or injury of the mother would not have occurred, or the handicap, disease or disability of an individual prior to birth would have been prevented, cured or ameliorated in a manner that preserved the health and life of such individual.

(c) As used in this section:
(1) "Abortion" has the same meaning as such term is defined in K.S.A. 65-6701, and amendments thereto.
(2) "Claim of wrongful birth" means a cause of action brought by a parent, legal guardian or other individual legally required to provide for the support of a minor, which seeks damages, whether economic or noneconomic, as a result of a physical condition of such minor that existed at the time of such minor’s birth, and which is based on a claim that a person’s action, or omission, contributed to such minor’s mother not obtaining an abortion.

(3) "Claim of wrongful life" means a cause of action brought by, or on behalf of, a minor, which seeks damages, whether economic or noneconomic, for such minor as a result of a physical condition of such minor that existed at the time of such minor’s birth, and which is based on a claim that a person’s action, or omission, contributed to such minor’s mother not obtaining an abortion.

It's a tort issue, not a license to lie.