Perhaps it is the underlying "red tape" of proving the mother's life is in danger or something similar. I read that in the case of the 10-year-old the Attorney General was questioning the reporting of the abortion by the doctor as required by law in Indiana. It turned out that she had legally reported it and that the papers were filed correctly. Maybe it is something like that??? I know it has been reported that doctors may stop performing abortions in Indiana. I also know that the interpretation of laws may be different depending on many variables as we see that all the time.The way I read the based on articles, the 10 week exception applies to rape/incest. 20 weeks if abnormalities and anytime the mothers life is endangered, which I would expect a woman to be at a hospital under that scenario.
The new law provides exceptions for when the life of the mother is at risk and for fatal fetal anomalies, up to 20 weeks post-fertilization. It also allows exceptions for some abortions if the pregnancy was a result of rape or incest. It will go into effect on September 15.
Indiana becomes first state post-Roe to pass law banning most abortions
Gov. Eric Holcomb on Friday signed a bill that would ban most abortions in Indiana -- making it the first state to pass a restrictive law against the procedure since Roe v. Wade was overturned this summer.www.google.com
Eli Lilly
- Thread starter Bethboilerfan
- Start date
cummins may have more from purdue than lilly.
jen, the new cummins ceo, is a purdue grad.
Industrial, Electrical, Mechanical, CIMT, Mfg Engineers, P.E. Developers from a variety of disciplines. I'd say 2-3 or more decades ago, it was mainly men. Much like any Engineering field now has women in it. I see that Cummins Sr. Mgt team consists of 6/15 women. The President and CEO is Jennifer Rumsey. As other posters put it, I cannot see Cummins moving to a blue state to give their "farm" away to taxes and regulations that will handcuff them while their competition are already in Red States to minimize tax or actively seeking Red States themselves.
Is this the sword that a Corporation wants to fall on? I don't think so.
On a side note: How many CEO's that are REP or DEM for that matter making 7 figures + stock options want to have the Govt come in to seize their documents and tie up their businesses? Last night was quite the eye opener seeing what one party will do with the aiding help of FBI, DOJ, and AG. Want to see what Socialism or Communism looks like, look at the headlines today of the raid last night. Additionally 87,000 IRS resources are going to go on the payroll of GOVT and it won't take long to tie up a lot of middle working class of America into audits, etc that will be nothing short of Authoritarian Leadership.
Let's separate the fear mongering about women's health from the majority of abortions. First of all, dangerous pregnancies are less than 10% of abortions. Secondarily, why would you want to have an abortion anywhere outside of a hospital if your life were in danger from your pregnancy. Secondarily, if you're raped or a family member is committing sexual assault against you, 10 weeks seems like a reasonable time period in which to address the issue. Quite honestly, I have no issue with extending that time limit.
I'm not saying Eli Lilly is a fear mongering company. I'm saying that when people bring up the Indiana abortion laws and state that they put women's lives in danger, they are extremely overexaggerating that fact.
No, you can no longer use abortion as a means of birth control. But everyone who was fearful of women's rights kept bringing up rape/incest and the life of the mother. Well, Indiana's law has reasonable exceptions for those issues. So let's take that issue off the table when we're bashing Indiana.
And the issue with Todd Rokita happened before the law went into effect. So I'm not sure what that has to do with anything.
Hmmm - your information on Cummins and hiring is helpful. Could you start a new thread about your side note as I really am enjoying this discussion and I don’t want thread hijacked. Thanks 🙏
Not trying to hijack, just pointing out there big issues that need as much if not more attention than just abortion.
I actually think it is a good idea to start a new thread on issues that should be discussed.
The Lilly position appears to assume all women are against the court ruling and affecting their business (it is still not an overturning but a remanding back to the states). We know that is not true as many women are in support. I am not even sure any polls are reliable as we have seen so many be way off. I would presume some would be attracted to Indiana based upon the above.
I thought it was an overturning of Roe v Wade? I don’t know if they are assuming that all women are against the court ruling but they seem to be assuming that women with degrees in pharmacy and women planning to get degrees are against the ruling. The recent rejection of the ballot proposal in Kansas really, really surprised me even though polls show that 61% of people support abortion in “all or most cases”. I can only think of one woman who supports a total ban and she is a very devout Catholic.
It was not a reversal as it was sent back to the states. If it was reversed, abortion would have been abolished. Someone is welcome to correct me if remanded is not the correct wording.
I doubt a majority are for a total ban but, if one added in rape, incest or the health of the mother it might be. One thing I am pretty certain is the left wants it all one way. No compromise. I would make exception for the Mom's health, incest or rape. People need to take responsibility for their bodies or are we simply animals oblivious to conduct? And no one wants to talk about the babies' rights.
Last edited:
I don't know the difference between an "overturning" and a "reversal"??? I agree with you about responsibility although I think that teenagers may not yet have enough frontal lobe thinking ability to recognize and understand the meaning of responsibility. I think if they overturn the right to conception as Clarence Thomas in his concurring opinion suggested* it would be brutal.
*"Then, he (i.e., Clarence Thomas) took aim at three other landmark cases that relied on that same legal reasoning: Griswold v. Connecticut, a 1965 decision that declared married couples had a right to contraception; Lawrence v. Texas, a 2003 case invalidating sodomy laws and making same-sex sexual activity legal across the country; and Obergefell v. Hodges, the 2015 case establishing the right of gay couples to marry."
Note that he did not say a word about Loving v. Virginia.
Last edited:
