Three Texas towns vote in favor of "sanctuary cities for the unborn," hoping to ban abortion
texastribune.org/2020/01/15/three-more-texans...Posted Jan 16, 2020, 3:24 PM UTC
Posted Jan 16, 2020, 3:24 PM UTC
I can't believe the anti choice crowd is so militant about this one issue for fucking decades now... like holy shit with everything else going on, they rather obsess over the "unborn".
You never see these hypocrites go after fertility treatments, surrogacy, or uterus transplants though! Even though that's sacrificing embryos like crazy, all for a possible pregnancy... why? Because they are pro pregnancy as punishment for sex & to keep "bad women" in line. It's how they keep control over women, knowing women have sex drives, free will, etc... they hate it.
This is why "anti abortion" types typically attach birth control & lack of sex ed to their agenda. Anyone this passionate would be promoting birth control like no tomorrow to prevent pregnancy... but nooo, they lie & say that's like having an abortion too! They lie about the science proving that's not the case. Same with sex ed... it's all about threatening women with pregnancy, so don't be "bad" with having sex & nothing else.
It's no coincidence their propaganda doesn't include fathers, except when it comes to him having "rights" to stop decisions... but have you ever seen them pass laws to hold men accountable, as one way to prevent any abortions related to poverty... ? Nope, instead they rather pass laws, to give lawyers to a fetus, to put women in jail.
The whole thing is a joke.
This is similar to the gun-crazies in Virginia who want a “sanctuary city” for their guns. It’s just insane people who can’t handle different opinions.
It seems no one understands what the hell a "sanctuary city" even is.
What it is not: Some sort of invisible force field that keeps ICE out of the area so they can't deport anyone who doesn't have legal authority to work and reside in the U.S. (or who lost those privileges for various reasons).
What it actually is: The local government and all its assorted bureaucracies won't report a known illegal immigrant to ICE. This sometimes extends to refusing to inquire about a person's legal status or documenting it in any way.
So, if these towns are taking the position that they themselves won't terminate any pregnancies, I certainly don't have a problem with that. That would be comparable to what a "sanctuary city" actually is vs. what both liberals and conservatives assume it is. But of course that isn't what they're proposing here.
Three Texas towns vote in favor of "sanctuary cities for the unborn," hoping to ban abortion
Edgar WaltersJan. 15, 2020
A billboard on Interstate 20 outside of Waskom displays an anti-abortion message.
Ben Fenton for The Texas Tribune
Three Texas towns recently voted in favor of anti-abortion ordinances, extending the reach of a campaign to create “sanctuary cities for the unborn” across the state.
The city councils of Big Spring and Colorado City — with populations around 28,000 and 4,000, respectively — voted Tuesday for a version of the controversial ordinance, which started popping up in small towns in East Texas last year. The ordinance aims to outlaw abortion if the U.S. Supreme Court makes it possible to do so. It also grants family members of women who have abortions the ability to sue the provider for emotional distress.
Big Spring’s vote was tentative; a majority of City Council members will need to vote once more in favor of the ordinance for it to pass. Colorado City’s vote, which also banned the sale of emergency contraception such as Plan B, was final, making it the eighth local government with such an ordinance in effect, according to the anti-abortion group pushing them. The East Texas town of Rusk approved a similar ordinance last week.
The ordinances are of contested legality and enforceability. The American Civil Liberties Union has said it is investigating a possible lawsuit seeking to strike them down. Three towns — Mineral Wells, Omaha and Jacksboro — have voted down similar ordinances or walked them back under advice from city attorneys.
But that hasn’t discouraged Mark Lee Dickson, the traveling anti-abortion activist who hopes to galvanize a statewide movement and perhaps provoke a lawsuit that could change abortion law nationwide.
“We have every intention of targeting every part of the state,” said Dickson, who said he is traveling to Levelland this week in hopes of persuading the town west of Lubbock to adopt a similar ordinance. “Every city, no matter what size, is valuable.”
Abortion rights advocates say the local ordinances are dangerous and intentionally confusing because they may lead people to believe, falsely, that abortion is illegal.
"This extreme proposal is a tactic for abortion opponents to score political points and mislead Texans about their rights," said Kamyon Conner, executive director of the Texas Equal Access Fund, which helps low-income women afford abortion. "Access to reproductive care and abortion allows individuals and families to receive the support needed to thrive in our state."
The strategy of bringing the abortion fight to the local level has divided even the staunchest anti-abortion activists. Some groups, including the Texas Alliance for Life, have warned against taking an inflammatory approach that is unlikely to survive a legal contest and could set the anti-abortion movement back in court.
Most provisions of the ordinance would not take effect unless the U.S. Supreme Court issues a new opinion on the legality of abortion. Specifically, the high court would need to overrule its 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade, a case that originated in Texas and led to the legalization of abortion nationwide by nullifying state laws that banned the procedure.
And the court would need to reverse its 1992 decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which allowed states to enact abortion restrictions only if they do not place an “undue burden” on a woman seeking to terminate her pregnancy.
But the ordinances, which do not make exceptions for rape or incest, immediately allow “any surviving relative of the aborted unborn child” to sue a person in civil court for performing an abortion within the towns where they were passed. In some towns, a person could also be sued for transporting a woman to an abortion clinic or helping pay for the procedure, though local officials have said that language is largely symbolic and would be difficult to enforce.
None of the “sanctuary cities for the unborn” is home to an abortion clinic, and the number of clinics in Texas has plummeted in recent years thanks to increasing restrictions on abortion rights imposed by the Texas Legislature.
lol this headline sounds so stupid, like, it just conjures the image of pregnant women running for the city border because the liberals are chasing them down with abortion pills???
Do they know how santuary cities work?
What does this mean, for real though? It means... what? They will stop pregnant women leaving the city for fear of them having an abortion? Using left/liberal language (sanctuary city) to talk about "harboring" anti-choice sentiments is so messed up. Humans choose to go to sanctuary cities to be protected: women choose to get abortions to protect themselves from a myriad of health and social issues.
Welcome to Reddit's most active feminist community! This is a women-centered, radical feminist subreddit to discuss gender from a critical, feminist perspective. If you’re new to gender critical feminism, please familiarize yourself with our FAQ and some of these resources.
Please follow the rules and consider if your submission is appropriate for this sub or if it should be posted to a sister subreddit. See our dictionary of common terms if you’re unfamiliar with lingo.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
When you give sanctuary to an illegal immigrant, you feed, clothe, and shelter them. Same with a political refugee, or anyone else to whom the word has traditionally applied. Waiting to see how that applies here.
[removed]
Uh, is the unborn child supposed to get to Texas him or herself for sanctuary?! This is so dumb