Abortion-Keep Legal, Yes or No?

Halifax2TheMax

Bentleyspop said:

GlowGirl said:

I am highly pro-choice. However, one issue I haven't heard discussed with this Texas restriction is what happens if an amnio test shows something developmentally wrong with the fetus. The test is usually done well after 6 weeks, and many women choose not to continue the pregnancy if there are any issues. What is supposed to happen in that case?

Forced birth

"Pro-life"= forced birth

And “pro life” until you’re born. Then you’re on your own, kid.

HughFreakingDillon

drakeheuer14 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

drakeheuer14 said:

Gern Blansten said:

drakeheuer14 said:

Gern Blansten said:

drakeheuer14 said:

mickeyrat said:

lets do this, forced vasectomies for all pubescent boys, reversable of course. When buddy boy feels ready to be daddy. reverse it.....

This extreme solution always confuses me. I get it’s said in jest (mostly), but extreme situations aside, it takes two to party. So if the goal is prevention, how about we make females take the same over protective precaution at the same time? 

So require the 13 year old rape victim to do what now?

I don’t have an answer for you. I get on the surface level how hard that would be since I will never be in that situation. But the situation around it doesn’t change in my mind that new life is being carried within her. So me saying yay abortion will never happen

No one says "yay abortion"...that attitude is why we have such a problem discussing this.

You call people "pro abortion" and nothing could be further from the truth.  I wish they were not necessary but that isn't realistic. 

I'm always amazed that people in the GOP (the "small government" party) are always willing to have the government get between a female and her doctor.

Poorly worded. But you are trying to imply that I should support abortion, and I just don’t. 

I can’t go back in time and change the narrative. Pro-abortion is just where we are in the terminology these days. I don’t like pro-choice, because it oversimplifies it and turns it into a positive. It just is what it is now. 

It’s preservation of life that I am after. The fetus may rely on the mother, but again, fully grown people rely on meds, devices and others to survive as well. 

no, it's wrong, because I literally just said I'm not pro abortion. literally zero people are pro abortion. I'd never be on board with my wife getting one. it just so happens we agree on it, but if we didn't, my stance would be the same, hence me being pro-choice. 

I wouldn’t say zero. Plenty of people laugh off abortion and see it as simple as birth control. 

so when you said this, you clearly were not referring to comics, or people joking. you were referring to people who don't use birth control because they can simply abort if they need to. 

GlowGirl

Bentleyspop said:

GlowGirl said:

I am highly pro-choice. However, one issue I haven't heard discussed with this Texas restriction is what happens if an amnio test shows something developmentally wrong with the fetus. The test is usually done well after 6 weeks, and many women choose not to continue the pregnancy if there are any issues. What is supposed to happen in that case?

Forced birth

"Pro-life"= forced birth

I can’t imagine the horror of being forced to carry to term a child who will have a terrible quality of life or may die soon after birth. This is why women get amnio and genetic testing while pregnant to avoid this. 

Bentleyspop

GlowGirl said:

Bentleyspop said:

GlowGirl said:

I am highly pro-choice. However, one issue I haven't heard discussed with this Texas restriction is what happens if an amnio test shows something developmentally wrong with the fetus. The test is usually done well after 6 weeks, and many women choose not to continue the pregnancy if there are any issues. What is supposed to happen in that case?

Forced birth

"Pro-life"= forced birth

I can’t imagine the horror of being forced to carry to term a child who will have a terrible quality of life or may die soon after birth. This is why women get amnio and genetic testing while pregnant to avoid this. 

Exactly 

But the "pro-lifers" don't care 
They want to force the birth no matter how painful the "quality" of life will be.

drakeheuer14

HughFreakingDillon said:

drakeheuer14 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

drakeheuer14 said:

Gern Blansten said:

drakeheuer14 said:

Gern Blansten said:

drakeheuer14 said:

mickeyrat said:

lets do this, forced vasectomies for all pubescent boys, reversable of course. When buddy boy feels ready to be daddy. reverse it.....

This extreme solution always confuses me. I get it’s said in jest (mostly), but extreme situations aside, it takes two to party. So if the goal is prevention, how about we make females take the same over protective precaution at the same time? 

So require the 13 year old rape victim to do what now?

I don’t have an answer for you. I get on the surface level how hard that would be since I will never be in that situation. But the situation around it doesn’t change in my mind that new life is being carried within her. So me saying yay abortion will never happen

No one says "yay abortion"...that attitude is why we have such a problem discussing this.

You call people "pro abortion" and nothing could be further from the truth.  I wish they were not necessary but that isn't realistic. 

I'm always amazed that people in the GOP (the "small government" party) are always willing to have the government get between a female and her doctor.

Poorly worded. But you are trying to imply that I should support abortion, and I just don’t. 

I can’t go back in time and change the narrative. Pro-abortion is just where we are in the terminology these days. I don’t like pro-choice, because it oversimplifies it and turns it into a positive. It just is what it is now. 

It’s preservation of life that I am after. The fetus may rely on the mother, but again, fully grown people rely on meds, devices and others to survive as well. 

no, it's wrong, because I literally just said I'm not pro abortion. literally zero people are pro abortion. I'd never be on board with my wife getting one. it just so happens we agree on it, but if we didn't, my stance would be the same, hence me being pro-choice. 

I wouldn’t say zero. Plenty of people laugh off abortion and see it as simple as birth control. 

so when you said this, you clearly were not referring to comics, or people joking. you were referring to people who don't use birth control because they can simply abort if they need to. 

If you want to take my statement in the most serious way possible, sure. I think laughing about it goes hand in hand with how it’s viewed as a fall back to some. It goes back to my previous comment about how habits might change if abortion wasn’t an option. 

The fact that people had a fit over the word plenty says enough that I guess I will have to be extra careful with my phrasing. 

I think I will see myself out again. 

oftenreading

drakeheuer14 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

drakeheuer14 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

drakeheuer14 said:

Gern Blansten said:

drakeheuer14 said:

Gern Blansten said:

drakeheuer14 said:

mickeyrat said:

lets do this, forced vasectomies for all pubescent boys, reversable of course. When buddy boy feels ready to be daddy. reverse it.....

This extreme solution always confuses me. I get it’s said in jest (mostly), but extreme situations aside, it takes two to party. So if the goal is prevention, how about we make females take the same over protective precaution at the same time? 

So require the 13 year old rape victim to do what now?

I don’t have an answer for you. I get on the surface level how hard that would be since I will never be in that situation. But the situation around it doesn’t change in my mind that new life is being carried within her. So me saying yay abortion will never happen

No one says "yay abortion"...that attitude is why we have such a problem discussing this.

You call people "pro abortion" and nothing could be further from the truth.  I wish they were not necessary but that isn't realistic. 

I'm always amazed that people in the GOP (the "small government" party) are always willing to have the government get between a female and her doctor.

Poorly worded. But you are trying to imply that I should support abortion, and I just don’t. 

I can’t go back in time and change the narrative. Pro-abortion is just where we are in the terminology these days. I don’t like pro-choice, because it oversimplifies it and turns it into a positive. It just is what it is now. 

It’s preservation of life that I am after. The fetus may rely on the mother, but again, fully grown people rely on meds, devices and others to survive as well. 

no, it's wrong, because I literally just said I'm not pro abortion. literally zero people are pro abortion. I'd never be on board with my wife getting one. it just so happens we agree on it, but if we didn't, my stance would be the same, hence me being pro-choice. 

I wouldn’t say zero. Plenty of people laugh off abortion and see it as simple as birth control. 

so when you said this, you clearly were not referring to comics, or people joking. you were referring to people who don't use birth control because they can simply abort if they need to. 

If you want to take my statement in the most serious way possible, sure. I think laughing about it goes hand in hand with how it’s viewed as a fall back to some. It goes back to my previous comment about how habits might change if abortion wasn’t an option. 

The fact that people had a fit over the word plenty says enough that I guess I will have to be extra careful with my phrasing. 

I think I will see myself out again. 

Abortion is always an option. All over the world women choose abortion. It just isn’t always a legal option, so criminalizing it forces women to turn to illegal and unsafe methods. Unless they have money, of course, in which case they go somewhere that it’s legal. Anyone who cares to look into this issue will discover that this is true. 

This law, and others like it, cause clear and measurable harms to women. 

Abortion should be available as a safe, accessible, affordable option for all women. Anything less increases injury, illness and death. 

HughFreakingDillon

drakeheuer14 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

drakeheuer14 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

drakeheuer14 said:

Gern Blansten said:

drakeheuer14 said:

Gern Blansten said:

drakeheuer14 said:

mickeyrat said:

lets do this, forced vasectomies for all pubescent boys, reversable of course. When buddy boy feels ready to be daddy. reverse it.....

This extreme solution always confuses me. I get it’s said in jest (mostly), but extreme situations aside, it takes two to party. So if the goal is prevention, how about we make females take the same over protective precaution at the same time? 

So require the 13 year old rape victim to do what now?

I don’t have an answer for you. I get on the surface level how hard that would be since I will never be in that situation. But the situation around it doesn’t change in my mind that new life is being carried within her. So me saying yay abortion will never happen

No one says "yay abortion"...that attitude is why we have such a problem discussing this.

You call people "pro abortion" and nothing could be further from the truth.  I wish they were not necessary but that isn't realistic. 

I'm always amazed that people in the GOP (the "small government" party) are always willing to have the government get between a female and her doctor.

Poorly worded. But you are trying to imply that I should support abortion, and I just don’t. 

I can’t go back in time and change the narrative. Pro-abortion is just where we are in the terminology these days. I don’t like pro-choice, because it oversimplifies it and turns it into a positive. It just is what it is now. 

It’s preservation of life that I am after. The fetus may rely on the mother, but again, fully grown people rely on meds, devices and others to survive as well. 

no, it's wrong, because I literally just said I'm not pro abortion. literally zero people are pro abortion. I'd never be on board with my wife getting one. it just so happens we agree on it, but if we didn't, my stance would be the same, hence me being pro-choice. 

I wouldn’t say zero. Plenty of people laugh off abortion and see it as simple as birth control. 

so when you said this, you clearly were not referring to comics, or people joking. you were referring to people who don't use birth control because they can simply abort if they need to. 

If you want to take my statement in the most serious way possible, sure. I think laughing about it goes hand in hand with how it’s viewed as a fall back to some. It goes back to my previous comment about how habits might change if abortion wasn’t an option. 

The fact that people had a fit over the word plenty says enough that I guess I will have to be extra careful with my phrasing. 

I think I will see myself out again. 

who had a fit, exactly? people took issue with it, but clearly not one "had a fit". 

hedonist

 oftenreading said:

drakeheuer14 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

drakeheuer14 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

drakeheuer14 said:

Gern Blansten said:

drakeheuer14 said:

Gern Blansten said:

drakeheuer14 said:

mickeyrat said:

lets do this, forced vasectomies for all pubescent boys, reversable of course. When buddy boy feels ready to be daddy. reverse it.....

This extreme solution always confuses me. I get it’s said in jest (mostly), but extreme situations aside, it takes two to party. So if the goal is prevention, how about we make females take the same over protective precaution at the same time? 

So require the 13 year old rape victim to do what now?

I don’t have an answer for you. I get on the surface level how hard that would be since I will never be in that situation. But the situation around it doesn’t change in my mind that new life is being carried within her. So me saying yay abortion will never happen

No one says "yay abortion"...that attitude is why we have such a problem discussing this.

You call people "pro abortion" and nothing could be further from the truth.  I wish they were not necessary but that isn't realistic. 

I'm always amazed that people in the GOP (the "small government" party) are always willing to have the government get between a female and her doctor.

Poorly worded. But you are trying to imply that I should support abortion, and I just don’t. 

I can’t go back in time and change the narrative. Pro-abortion is just where we are in the terminology these days. I don’t like pro-choice, because it oversimplifies it and turns it into a positive. It just is what it is now. 

It’s preservation of life that I am after. The fetus may rely on the mother, but again, fully grown people rely on meds, devices and others to survive as well. 

no, it's wrong, because I literally just said I'm not pro abortion. literally zero people are pro abortion. I'd never be on board with my wife getting one. it just so happens we agree on it, but if we didn't, my stance would be the same, hence me being pro-choice. 

I wouldn’t say zero. Plenty of people laugh off abortion and see it as simple as birth control. 

so when you said this, you clearly were not referring to comics, or people joking. you were referring to people who don't use birth control because they can simply abort if they need to. 

If you want to take my statement in the most serious way possible, sure. I think laughing about it goes hand in hand with how it’s viewed as a fall back to some. It goes back to my previous comment about how habits might change if abortion wasn’t an option. 

The fact that people had a fit over the word plenty says enough that I guess I will have to be extra careful with my phrasing. 

I think I will see myself out again. 

Abortion is always an option. All over the world women choose abortion. It just isn’t always a legal option, so criminalizing it forces women to turn to illegal and unsafe methods. Unless they have money, of course, in which case they go somewhere that it’s legal. Anyone who cares to look into this issue will discover that this is true. 

This law, and others like it, cause clear and measurable harms to women. 

Abortion should be available as a safe, accessible, affordable option for all women. Anything less increases injury, illness and death. 

Wire hangers played (still play?) a big part of laws prohibiting abortions and the unnecessary injury/death of desperate women. “No wire hangers” wasn’t just a line from Mommie Dearest, dammit.  

mrussel1

This law is worse than you can imagine, because it's not actually a criminal law.  It's a civil law, enforced by citizens who are actually deputized by the state.  Roe V Wade protects the right of abortion from gov't interference.  This state is not providing the interference.  If a citizen suspects that a woman (and/or a clinic, I'm not quite sure) had an abortion past the heartbeat stage, the citizen can file a civil suit.  

If the citizen prevails, they are entitled to a $10,000 civil judgment, plus attorney and court costs.  What's worse, if the citizen does not prevail, the woman (defendant) is NOT entitled to attorney fees.  So essentially a woman will have to spend money defending herself in either case.  And because someone can bring a frivolous case, you will see 'revenge suits' that likely have no merit.  I mean this is a total travesty of justice.  

oftenreading

mrussel1 said:

This law is worse than you can imagine, because it's not actually a criminal law.  It's a civil law, enforced by citizens who are actually deputized by the state.  Roe V Wade protects the right of abortion from gov't interference.  This state is not providing the interference.  If a citizen suspects that a woman (and/or a clinic, I'm not quite sure) had an abortion past the heartbeat stage, the citizen can file a civil suit.  

If the citizen prevails, they are entitled to a $10,000 civil judgment, plus attorney and court costs.  What's worse, if the citizen does not prevail, the woman (defendant) is NOT entitled to attorney fees.  So essentially a woman will have to spend money defending herself in either case.  And because someone can bring a frivolous case, you will see 'revenge suits' that likely have no merit.  I mean this is a total travesty of justice.  

It’s a travesty, and those who brought it forward and those who support it should be ashamed of themselves. It’s punishment, pure and simple. 

mrussel1

oftenreading said:

mrussel1 said:

This law is worse than you can imagine, because it's not actually a criminal law.  It's a civil law, enforced by citizens who are actually deputized by the state.  Roe V Wade protects the right of abortion from gov't interference.  This state is not providing the interference.  If a citizen suspects that a woman (and/or a clinic, I'm not quite sure) had an abortion past the heartbeat stage, the citizen can file a civil suit.  

If the citizen prevails, they are entitled to a $10,000 civil judgment, plus attorney and court costs.  What's worse, if the citizen does not prevail, the woman (defendant) is NOT entitled to attorney fees.  So essentially a woman will have to spend money defending herself in either case.  And because someone can bring a frivolous case, you will see 'revenge suits' that likely have no merit.  I mean this is a total travesty of justice.  

It’s a travesty, and those who brought it forward and those who support it should be ashamed of themselves. It’s punishment, pure and simple. 

If there's a bright side... it will galvanize D's to come out in force.  If the R's want abortion on the ballot in 2022, well they've got it.  

mace1229

drakeheuer14 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

drakeheuer14 said:

Gern Blansten said:

drakeheuer14 said:

Gern Blansten said:

drakeheuer14 said:

mickeyrat said:

lets do this, forced vasectomies for all pubescent boys, reversable of course. When buddy boy feels ready to be daddy. reverse it.....

This extreme solution always confuses me. I get it’s said in jest (mostly), but extreme situations aside, it takes two to party. So if the goal is prevention, how about we make females take the same over protective precaution at the same time? 

So require the 13 year old rape victim to do what now?

I don’t have an answer for you. I get on the surface level how hard that would be since I will never be in that situation. But the situation around it doesn’t change in my mind that new life is being carried within her. So me saying yay abortion will never happen

No one says "yay abortion"...that attitude is why we have such a problem discussing this.

You call people "pro abortion" and nothing could be further from the truth.  I wish they were not necessary but that isn't realistic. 

I'm always amazed that people in the GOP (the "small government" party) are always willing to have the government get between a female and her doctor.

Poorly worded. But you are trying to imply that I should support abortion, and I just don’t. 

I can’t go back in time and change the narrative. Pro-abortion is just where we are in the terminology these days. I don’t like pro-choice, because it oversimplifies it and turns it into a positive. It just is what it is now. 

It’s preservation of life that I am after. The fetus may rely on the mother, but again, fully grown people rely on meds, devices and others to survive as well. 

no, it's wrong, because I literally just said I'm not pro abortion. literally zero people are pro abortion. I'd never be on board with my wife getting one. it just so happens we agree on it, but if we didn't, my stance would be the same, hence me being pro-choice. 

I wouldn’t say zero. Plenty of people laugh off abortion and see it as simple as birth control. 

This was the only thing that came to mind after reading this. But even this example my feelings were this attitude is probably rare and more than likely trying to prove a point rather than representing how they truly feel. I don’t see anyone realistically celebrating or laughing off abortion.  But still, in poor taste.
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/students-shout-their-abortions-to-disrupt-a-pro-life-display/

HughFreakingDillon

mrussel1 said:

oftenreading said:

mrussel1 said:

This law is worse than you can imagine, because it's not actually a criminal law.  It's a civil law, enforced by citizens who are actually deputized by the state.  Roe V Wade protects the right of abortion from gov't interference.  This state is not providing the interference.  If a citizen suspects that a woman (and/or a clinic, I'm not quite sure) had an abortion past the heartbeat stage, the citizen can file a civil suit.  

If the citizen prevails, they are entitled to a $10,000 civil judgment, plus attorney and court costs.  What's worse, if the citizen does not prevail, the woman (defendant) is NOT entitled to attorney fees.  So essentially a woman will have to spend money defending herself in either case.  And because someone can bring a frivolous case, you will see 'revenge suits' that likely have no merit.  I mean this is a total travesty of justice.  

It’s a travesty, and those who brought it forward and those who support it should be ashamed of themselves. It’s punishment, pure and simple. 

If there's a bright side... it will galvanize D's to come out in force.  If the R's want abortion on the ballot in 2022, well they've got it.  

was just reading a twitter thread that actually said that many R's actually never wanted this back on the ballot; because it could cost them a LOT of seats. They liked the moral high ground of being pro life without having to actually back it at the polls. 

interesting take. 

oftenreading

You know what’s really in poor taste? 

Interfering with someone’s reproductive choices. 

Halifax2TheMax

mrussel1 said:

This law is worse than you can imagine, because it's not actually a criminal law.  It's a civil law, enforced by citizens who are actually deputized by the state.  Roe V Wade protects the right of abortion from gov't interference.  This state is not providing the interference.  If a citizen suspects that a woman (and/or a clinic, I'm not quite sure) had an abortion past the heartbeat stage, the citizen can file a civil suit.  

If the citizen prevails, they are entitled to a $10,000 civil judgment, plus attorney and court costs.  What's worse, if the citizen does not prevail, the woman (defendant) is NOT entitled to attorney fees.  So essentially a woman will have to spend money defending herself in either case.  And because someone can bring a frivolous case, you will see 'revenge suits' that likely have no merit.  I mean this is a total travesty of justice.  

Not only that but the suit can be filed in any county in Tejas by any US citizen, requiring the clinic/defendant to travel, definitely some potential long distances. But imagine, some evangelical pro-lifer in Maine can come on down to Tejas and file suit. And guess what? If you’re the defendant, you’ve got to respond. What Tejas has in size it certainly lacks in compassion.

Time to boycott ATT, American Airlines, Southwest, Tito’s Vodka and any other corporation or product headquartered, produced/manufactured or who donated to those repubs that wrote, passed and signed that bill into law.

Please, Mexico, take Tejas back. We’ll pay you to take it, please?

https://www.instagram.com/p/CTVNyenF8Xq/?utm_medium=copy_link

Bentleyspop

https://twitter.com/PearlJam/status/1433617582846787585?s=19

mrussel1

Halifax2TheMax said:

mrussel1 said:

This law is worse than you can imagine, because it's not actually a criminal law.  It's a civil law, enforced by citizens who are actually deputized by the state.  Roe V Wade protects the right of abortion from gov't interference.  This state is not providing the interference.  If a citizen suspects that a woman (and/or a clinic, I'm not quite sure) had an abortion past the heartbeat stage, the citizen can file a civil suit.  

If the citizen prevails, they are entitled to a $10,000 civil judgment, plus attorney and court costs.  What's worse, if the citizen does not prevail, the woman (defendant) is NOT entitled to attorney fees.  So essentially a woman will have to spend money defending herself in either case.  And because someone can bring a frivolous case, you will see 'revenge suits' that likely have no merit.  I mean this is a total travesty of justice.  

Not only that but the suit can be filed in any county in Tejas by any US citizen, requiring the clinic/defendant to travel, definitely some potential long distances. But imagine, some evangelical pro-lifer in Maine can come on down to Tejas and file suit. And guess what? If you’re the defendant, you’ve got to respond. What Tejas has in size it certainly lacks in compassion.

Time to boycott ATT, American Airlines, Southwest, Tito’s Vodka and any other corporation or product headquartered, produced/manufactured or who donated to those repubs that wrote, passed and signed that bill into law.

Please, Mexico, take Tejas back. We’ll pay you to take it, please?

https://www.instagram.com/p/CTVNyenF8Xq/?utm_medium=copy_link

I don't think that's true.  That's a venue issue.  You can't sue a someone from Maine for what they did in Maine.  The statute doesn't apply.

The Juggler

Abortion will be a bigger issue in the midterms than Afghanistan. In a way, Texas did the dems a favor. 

The Juggler

JB16057 said:

The Juggler said:

HEY! While we are on the subject of joking about abortions, here is your friendly reminder that Donald Trump, your lord and savior,  once joked about aborting HIS OWN DAUGHTER! But sure...get all high and mighty some dumb girl on tiktok

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/01/video-trump-jokes-about-having-wanted-abortion.html

Do March for Life Protesters Remember the Time Trump Joked About Having Wanted to Abort One of His Children?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMzFVcLBAD4

BY BEN MATHIS-LILLEY

JAN 27, 201712:22 PM

TWEETSHARECOMMENT

Trump administration figures Mike Pence and Kellyanne Conway are scheduled to speak at this year’s edition of the annual March for Life pro-life rally in Washington on Friday. Trump, meanwhile, has said that his Supreme Court nominees will be chosen with the goal of overturning Roe v. Wade. (Though here’s why that might not happen even if Trump gets to appoint multiple justices.)

This pro-life president, though, was famously pro-choice before deciding that he wanted to be the Republican nominee. In 2016, he refused to answer Times columnist Maureen Dowd’s question about whether he’d ever paid for or been otherwise involved in the procurement of an abortion. And above is an MSNBC clip of a 2003 Trump appearance on Howard Stern’s radio show in which he laughs about being talked into not aborting a surprise pregnancy. (It’d seem, given the timing of Trump’s children’s births, that he’s talking about Marla Maples, who’s said the conception of their daughter, Tiffany, was a surprise, and MSNBC asserts as much. But no one says Maples’ name in the clip.)

Also of note: The context of the discussion above is that Trump is talking about how pleased he is that his then-girlfriend Melania has been consistently taking birth control pills. The organization that runs the March for Life successfully sued the Obama administration to be exempted from the Affordable Care Act’s contraceptive coverage requirements.

Thank you for the Trump video. It only helps to prove others here that they are wrong when they say no one jokes about having abortions.

Trump is not my lord and savior. Does it make you feel better when you make shit up about other people? Actually, don't answer that question because I don't care.

Strange how you seem more upset over some fake tiktok videos than you do about Trump literally joking about aborting his own daughter. 

Halifax2TheMax

mrussel1 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

mrussel1 said:

This law is worse than you can imagine, because it's not actually a criminal law.  It's a civil law, enforced by citizens who are actually deputized by the state.  Roe V Wade protects the right of abortion from gov't interference.  This state is not providing the interference.  If a citizen suspects that a woman (and/or a clinic, I'm not quite sure) had an abortion past the heartbeat stage, the citizen can file a civil suit.  

If the citizen prevails, they are entitled to a $10,000 civil judgment, plus attorney and court costs.  What's worse, if the citizen does not prevail, the woman (defendant) is NOT entitled to attorney fees.  So essentially a woman will have to spend money defending herself in either case.  And because someone can bring a frivolous case, you will see 'revenge suits' that likely have no merit.  I mean this is a total travesty of justice.  

Not only that but the suit can be filed in any county in Tejas by any US citizen, requiring the clinic/defendant to travel, definitely some potential long distances. But imagine, some evangelical pro-lifer in Maine can come on down to Tejas and file suit. And guess what? If you’re the defendant, you’ve got to respond. What Tejas has in size it certainly lacks in compassion.

Time to boycott ATT, American Airlines, Southwest, Tito’s Vodka and any other corporation or product headquartered, produced/manufactured or who donated to those repubs that wrote, passed and signed that bill into law.

Please, Mexico, take Tejas back. We’ll pay you to take it, please?

https://www.instagram.com/p/CTVNyenF8Xq/?utm_medium=copy_link

I don't think that's true.  That's a venue issue.  You can't sue a someone from Maine for what they did in Maine.  The statute doesn't apply.

A citizen from Maine can sue an abortion provider or facilitator in Tejas. Any US citizen can file in Tejas.