Is this what winning looks like?

Is Texas winning? Or is this doctor winning?

A defiant Texas doctor has boldly gone public about a newly illegal abortion procedure he performed earlier this month, saying he had a “duty of care” to his patient and she had a “fundamental right” to an abortion.

“I fully understood that there could be legal consequences,” Dr. Alan Braid, of San Antonio, wrote in an essay Saturday in The Washington Post. “But I wanted to make sure that Texas didn’t get away with its bid to prevent this blatantly unconstitutional law from being tested.”

Braid began practicing medicine in 1972, a year before the U.S. Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision recognized a woman’s constitutional right to an abortion.

“At the hospital that year, I saw three teenagers die from illegal abortions,” he recounted. “One I will never forget. When she came into the ER, her vaginal cavity was packed with rags. She died a few days later from massive organ failure, caused by a septic infection.”

In medical school in Texas, “we’d been taught that abortion was an integral part of women’s health care,” Braid noted. After Roe v. Wade in 1973 recognized “abortion as a constitutional right, it enabled me to do the job I was trained to do,” he added.

Now Braid, who has delivered about 10,000 babies over the years, says it’s “1972 all over again.”

Women who come into Braid’s clinic for an abortion often explain why: They can’t afford another baby, they’re in an abusive relationship, it’s the wrong time. Several times a month, women seeking an abortion report that have been raped, the physician wrote.

Now women have to travel out of state for an abortion. One recent patient faced a nine-hour trip to Oklahoma. Even with financial help, she couldn’t risk missing work to support her four children, and she had no child care options while she was away, Braid recounted.

“I understand that by providing an abortion beyond the new legal limit, I am taking a personal risk,” noted Braid, who is currently part of a federal lawsuit against the Texas restrictions that was launched by the Center for Reproductive Rights.

But, he added: “I have daughters, granddaughters and nieces. I believe abortion is an essential part of health care. I have spent the past 50 years treating and helping patients. I can’t just sit back and watch us return to 1972.”

The new Texas law, the most restrictive in the nation, bans abortions after six weeks of pregnancy, at a stage when most women don’t even know they’re pregnant. It makes no exceptions for rape or incest. The new time limit means that 80% of the abortions that had been performed in Braid’s clinic could no longer be provided, he noted.

Enforcement of the law is left up to civilian vigilantes who can earn a $10,000 bounty if they successfully sue anyone who “aids and abets” an illegal abortion, from doctors to clinic staff to even a friend who drives a patient to a clinic. Reports are currently largely being handled by the right-wing evangelical group Texas Right to Life.

A Texas Right to Life spokesperson responding to Braid’s article told the San Antonio Express-News on Saturday: “We are fully aware of this and intend to hold anyone who violates the law accountable. The first step is making sure an actual violation occurred.”

The Department of Justice filed a lawsuit earlier this month against Texas, arguing that the law violates the U.S. Constitution.

How can causing the death of an innocent be a right? Where is such a “right” in the Constitution (I don’t mean jurisprudence; I mean where it actually says it in the Constitution)?

I suspect his “personal risk” is being covered by the likes of Planned (un)Parenthood, or other radical left entities.

Face Of A Murderer … (Conviently Removed)

Can a book and movie deal be in the shadows?

So many questions …

If your wife was raped, would you force he to have the child?

If your wife was told that taking the fetus to birth would almost certainly kill her, would you force her to try anyway?

If a teen raped his sister, do you think she should be forced to have the child?

If you answered yes to all of these questions, then you are a man of your principles, just don’t force me and my wife and family to make the decisions you’d make in this case.

Setting aside the more “convenient reasons” for having an abortion, the idea that Texas would codify this into law only shows how devastatingly backwards people on the “red” portions of Texas have become.

Further, the way that Texas as skirted the rules is a warning to all of you second amendment supporters.

Texas has so far avoided being sued because it put the enforcement portion of this law in the hands of the people, meaning there was no one to preemptively sue in order to stop this law.

The right has opened a pandoras box using these methods and I’d be surprised if the anti-gun states don’t use the EXACT same techniques to skirt the Constitution when it comes to the second amendment.

How you win is just as important as what you win.

Not sure what I’m talking about?

Here:

1 If your wife were raped, would you force the child to die?
2 That’s a tougher one, but if there’s a chance for the child to live, I’d say carrying said child to term is the right thing to do.
3 Same as 1.
4 Should we allow the same freedom for the killing of a two-year-old?

5 How so?
6 Also how so?
7 Part of it, as near as I understand.
8 Abortion isn’t a Pandora’s box?
9 The end doesn’t justify the means. But I’m still not seeing the problem.

I find it interesting how democrats support killing a baby right up until the moment when the mother gives birth. Yet when you bring up this point, all of the sudden they really care about children. “That’s barbaric!”

It’s also interesting how they always talk about “well what if it’s an incest baby” or “what if it’s a rape baby” or “what if the mom is going to die?” ---- none of these are the reasons abortion exist and none of these are the reason abortion advocates want what they want. The vast majority of abortions have nothing to do with these and they know it.

(I also love how they switched the word “infanticide” with "woman’s right to choose; i see what you did there)

It’s been pointed out that with prenatal surgery, we now have the ridiculous situation in which a baby can be killed in the womb, be temporarily removed from the womb for surgery and be protected by law, and then be legal to kill that baby again after the surgery and replacement in the womb.

1 Like