HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » The GOP tax scam has a "p...

Thu Nov 30, 2017, 10:48 PM

The GOP tax scam has a "person-hood" bit that furthers their attempts at anti-woman and anti-choice

On page 93 of the “tax bill” Republicans are trying to redefine what constitutes an unborn child as the moment of conception. The tax code is no place to slip in something that could be used to outlaw abortion. A yes vote on this is anti-women & anti-choice.









From Snopes.com regarding this: Thanks to still_one

https://www.snopes.com/gop-tax-bill-fetal-personhood-legislation/


Placing this language in the bill is a strategic political effort that further highlights an escalating trend and effort to constrain and curtail full reproductive health and rights of American women. […] The term used in the bill, “unborn,” is not a medical or scientific distinction, but a political one. Politicians are now seeking to grant the “unborn” legal rights, but primarily in relation only to women. […]

Substantively, these efforts not only seek to grant legal rights and identities to embryos and fetuses, but they also seek to frame a conflict of interest between women, endowed with constitutional rights, and an embryo or fetus such that legislators will claim there is no difference in the legal status between a pregnant woman and fetus.

4 replies, 1312 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 4 replies Author Time Post
Reply The GOP tax scam has a "person-hood" bit that furthers their attempts at anti-woman and anti-choice (Original post)
Maraya1969 Nov 2017 OP
stopbush Nov 2017 #1
58Sunliner Nov 2017 #2
Deb Dec 2017 #3
Gothmog Dec 2017 #4

Response to Maraya1969 (Original post)

Thu Nov 30, 2017, 10:58 PM

1. Fucking Christians.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maraya1969 (Original post)

Thu Nov 30, 2017, 11:15 PM

2. Are you Fuc**ng kidding?? No fucking way!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maraya1969 (Original post)

Fri Dec 1, 2017, 05:17 AM

3. So..No medical prescriptions for women of childbearing age?

Because your Dr. can never be quite sure of damaging a "4+ cell person".
Let the lawsuits begin.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maraya1969 (Original post)

Fri Dec 1, 2017, 10:43 AM

4. How does this provision pass the Byrd rule test?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread