We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
OKLAHOMA GOVERNOR KEVIN Stitt has signed into law the strictest abortion ban in the US, making the state the first in the nation to effectively end availability of the procedure.
State politicians approved the ban enforced by civil lawsuits rather than criminal prosecution, similar to a Texas law that was passed last year.
The law takes effect immediately upon Stitt’s signature and prohibits all abortions with few exceptions. Abortion providers have said they will stop performing the procedure as soon as the bill is signed.
“I promised Oklahomans that as governor I would sign every piece of pro-life legislation that came across my desk and I am proud to keep that promise today,” the first-term Republican said in a statement.
“From the moment life begins at conception is when we have a responsibility as human beings to do everything we can to protect that baby’s life and the life of the mother. That is what I believe and that is what the majority of Oklahomans believe.”
Abortion providers across the country have been bracing for the possibility that the US Supreme Court’s new conservative majority might further restrict the practice, and that has especially been the case in Oklahoma and Texas.
“The impact will be disastrous for Oklahomans,” said Elizabeth Nash, a state policy analyst for the abortion-rights supporting Guttmacher Institute.
“It will also have severe ripple effects, especially for Texas patients who had been traveling to Oklahoma in large numbers after the Texas six-week abortion ban went into effect in September.”
The bills are part of an aggressive push in Republican-led states to scale back abortion rights. It comes on the heels of a leaked draft opinion from the nation’s high court that suggests justices are considering weakening or overturning the landmark Roe v Wade decision that legalised abortion nearly 50 years ago.
The only exceptions in the Oklahoma law are to save the life of a pregnant woman or if the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest that has been reported to law enforcement.
The bill specifically authorises doctors to remove a “dead unborn child caused by spontaneous abortion”, or miscarriage, or to remove an ectopic pregnancy, a potentially life-threatening emergency that occurs when a fertilized egg implants outside the uterus, often in a fallopian tube and early in pregnancy.
The law also does not apply to the use of morning-after pills such as Plan B or any type of contraception.
Two of Oklahoma’s four abortion clinics already stopped providing abortions after the governor signed a six-week ban earlier this month.
With the state’s two remaining abortion clinics expected to stop offering services, it is unclear what will happen to women who qualify under one of the exceptions.
The law’s author, state representative Wendi Stearman, says doctors will be empowered to decide which women qualify and that those abortions will be performed in hospitals. But providers and abortion-rights activists warn that trying to prove qualification could prove difficult and even dangerous in some circumstances.
In addition to the Texas-style bill already signed into law, the measure is one of at least three anti-abortion bills sent this year to Mr Stitt.
Oklahoma’s law is styled after a first-of-its-kind Texas law that the US Supreme Court has allowed to remain in place that allows private citizens to sue abortion providers or anyone who helps a woman obtain an abortion. Other Republican-led states sought to copy Texas’ ban.
Idaho’s governor signed the first copycat measure in March, although it has been temporarily blocked by the state’s Supreme Court.
The third Oklahoma bill is to take effect this summer and would make it a felony to perform an abortion, punishable by up to 10 years in prison. That bill contains no exceptions for rape or incest.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Maurice will be along to boast about “protecting babies” and in the same breath condemn anyone who advocates for gun control laws.
Can’t be having people interrupt the guy that boasted about signing a law that made it even easier to buy and carry guns.
@Tricia G ☘️: I don’t agree with Maurice on what he comments on this topic but it’s unfair to call him out when he didn’t actually comment yet and he is entitled to his view on this subject whether you agree or not, argue the comment not the person.
@Garreth mc mahon: he will be along though.
@Tricia G ☘️: These issues have always resulted in opposing views in the extreme and never more than now, in the era in which the desire to debate issues and find compromises, has been replaced with silencing any and all opposing views.
It’s somewhat ironic that the ultimate positions of the gun control lobby and the pro life lobby are both a total ban and that the right to choose and pro gun lobbies both advocate for zero restrictions to exercise personal freedoms.
Without doubt the murder of the children and adults in Texas was horrendous, but calling for gun bans triggers an entrenched response of political and media pantomime, because though gun control advocates claim they want reasonable controls its just incremental steps to a ban.
The pro life also calls for rolling back from full access to abortion services, with incremental controls and arbitrary cut off points, such as when they believe life begins based on religious belief, despite science saying otherwise.
Abortion also results in political and media pantomime and for the very same reasons, pro life advocates call for controls on abortion services, but only as part of an incremental route to a full ban.
Its difficult for people to accept, but there are valid reasons and justifications for both the rights to abortion services and the right to bear arms and simultaneously preventing unwanted pregnancies and guns being accessible to mentality deranged people.
If people want to reduce the number of abortions and the number of mass shootings in the USA, the compromises are pretty obvious, for the pro life lobby to promote realistic sex education and free contraception and for the gun control lobby to set a full and final requirement of federal background checks and firearms safety training for all gun ownership and end their campaign.
But neither of these will happen, because people have turned these issue into money making crusades, though which they have gained personal prestige within they support base and a personal revenue stream and lifestyle, either as politicians or campaigners.
Sorry for the essay…
:-)
@David Van-Standen: “calling for gun bans” – No one is calling for gun bans. Stop misrepresenting what’s being asked for. The VAST majority are asking for sensible, federal level, gun control policies.
“because though gun control advocates claim they want reasonable controls its just incremental steps to a ban.” – That’s a lie, and one used to shut down ALL discussions of sensible rules surrounding access to guns.
Conflating abortion opponants with people calling for those looking for sensible gun laws is flat out wrong. Anti-Abortion advocates are overwhelmingly religious, and their religion (currently) claims that all abortions are wrong. Gun law advocates are not driven by a religious belief, they are not comparable.
Anti-Abortion campaigners can’t compromise. It’s literally against what they claim their god wants.
Gun control advocates aren’t answerable to “god”, and they aren’t calling for an all out ban. Claiming they are is a flat out lie. But your entire premise, that they’re comparable, is based on it being true so you make the claim.
Anti-Abortion policies were adopted by the Christian Right to win influence in politics. This has been well documented.
Sensible gun laws have near universal support.
They’re NOT the same.
@Tricia G ☘️: Typical intolerant leftist, “my comment good, anyone who opposes me must be shut down publicly”.
@David Bohane: Geez what thin skin you have. I just see a reasoned response to a post.
Personally it seems totally illogical to me that you wouldn’t introduce gun control laws to address kids being murdered in schools because your afraid they might lead to something more. If people are that worried about losing their semi automatic guns maybe we can all send them some thoughts and prayers.
@Pablo:I am referring to first comment on page, If you see as “reasoned”, someone naming a commenter before they actually comment so to ridicule them in a typical leftists bullying way, then go you.
Nice decal by the way, pity you don’t see the irony of it, all inclusive versus cancelling other opinions.
@David Bohane: A pre-emptive strike it may have been, but I fail to see how it’s cancelling anyones opinions. Maurice is free to comment, and has nailed his colours to the mast quite vocally in the past about abortion. I’m unsure of his opinion on gun control but if he is against it then it’s a little hypocritical.
If you want to talk about irony, I think you’ll find it in your own comment (typical intorerant leftist) while at the same time bemoaning the cancelling of opinions.
@Pablo: ” a Pre-emptive strike” on a comment and opinion page?, see your colours or lack of have become apparent Just to be clear in case you had not noticed for the last couple of years , it is the lefts agenda to shut down opposing views, if you are not aware of such, that’s your willful ignorance, I called it what it was “intolerant leftism” though I will never apply to have a comment removed. got it?
@Tricia G ☘️: Lets examine my alleged lie regarding “sensible gun laws” ultimately leading to full bans, by looking at an example much closer to Ireland.
The horrendous murders carried out in Dunblane carried out by T Hamilton gave the UK gun control/anti gun lobby the platform to move forward with an existing agenda, this was portrayed as sensible gun control measures, banning centrefire handguns that sportsmen and women used in international competitions, they even enlisted the Olympic shooters to support this ban, by stating that their Olympic shooting disciplines were a special case and therefore protected from any pistol ban, but of course once the centrfire pistols had been banned for public safety, they then went after the Olympic pistols and banned them too…
Furthermore this complete ban happening from the premise of the implementation of alleged sensible gun control measures,was lauded by gun control advocates in the USA as the way forward and for second ammendment advocates it confirmed their greatest fear, that incremental concessions to alleged sensible gun control measures, were a slippery slope to losing their right to bear arms, as confirmed by what happened in the UK and that once the initial measure was out in place, the campaign moved on to the next restriction and ultimately full ban.
Or are you going tell me that is not what happened in the UK?
@David Van-Standen: I was living in Glasgow during the Dunblane atrocity. Yes, the murderer was carrying legally held handguns. And yes, there was huge support for a ban on certain types of handguns after that (btw – I didn’t actually support that ban but then, I was young).
Regarding the “slippery slope”; the ban on the types of guns carried in 3 Olympic events is no longer applicable. The UK does submit people to those shooting events, and they can own and practice with those guns. So there are exceptions to the ban and the competitors work within those rules.
Another counter to your “slippery slope” claim, there has not been a blanket ban of guns in the UK. It is still legal to own rifles, shotguns, certain types of pistols and some handguns. All require a licence, background check etc. Banning the types of guns that Hamilton used hasn’t led to a full ban on all firearms.
You take a narrow aspect of one story and try to apply it to suit your own narrative.
That’s not even touching on how ridiculous it is to compare the UK to the US where there is a literal Constitutional Amendment and an entire history of gun ownership to counter. Again, you compare the incomparable.
You should really stop doing that. And invoking Dunblane, really?
@Garreth mc mahon: Cheers for this
@Tricia G ☘️: Invoking Dunblane?
You literally took the comment section of an article on an abortion ban in Oklahoma and connected it to gun control all by yourself.
You state you were in Glasgow, when Dunblane happened as if it gives your opinions some superiority, if I claim I was in Dunblane on the day does that make my opinion more valid? I don’t think so.
Your argument about not all guns were banned in the Uk is a red herring, the point was that a single change to gun laws was the full and final requirement, but when it was achieved the push for more restrictions continued and still continues.
Your assertion that some guns are still available, is the golf bag argument used by the gun control lobby, that any club can hit a ball so what’s the big deal??
If a similar ban was applied to competitive martial arts, because of the number of people that get killed ever year in street fights, would that be fair and proportionate? Would you tell them they could still do Tai chi in response to their objections?
I understand that people have different views on issues of abortion and firearms, due to their personal experience or the lack their of and their beliefs, I respect their right to hold those views, but I dont support the imposition of those views on others on either of these issue by prohibition, which is the ultimate goal of both anti lobbies on these issue, regardless of your protestations to the contrary.
@Tricia G ☘️: Maurice is spoofer- he’s a non person. Learn that and move on.
@David Bohane: I tend to find that anyone who deals in absolutes, like you are with your “leftist bullying ways” is so entrenched in their own point of view that they can’t really give a balanced and reasonable opinion. Case in point, you clearly believe that people on the left of politics are all out to shut down opposing views …. that’s as dumb as me saying all people on the right support the likes of Trump. It’s simplistic and idiotic, got it ?
@Pablo: You have said enough dumb things already kid.
If you really want to be pro life, ban guns.
Pro-birth at all costs, not pro-life in any way. If they were pro-life, they’d support things like universal childcare, universal healthcare, improved social welfare, gun reform, maybe even universal basic income, and so much more.
@Tomo: I’d argue that they’re not even pro-birth. Maternity care is not funded. In most rural counties it’s very poor. Maternal mortality rates are higher in the US than most other 1st World countries. If they actually cared about getting to Birth they’d fund better healthcare.
They don’t.
It’s all theatre. It’s all about LOOKING like your care but in reality, it’s just a way to get votes.
@Tricia G ☘️:
I’m sure he’ll be pretty proactive in solving the issue of how hospital births would land low paid workers without healthcare insurance with thousands of dollars of debt, and enshrining paid maternity leave, etc.
Better paid women have at least some options for travel, but OK is going to be far from anywhere providing the service, soon.
From a bit of a different side of things, can’t help but think that there could be a spike in rape accusations to deal with.
Impossible that they can’t see the irony here.
@Katie Wrest: All about power. Not a democracy.
@Katie Wrest: Pro-lifers have always only cared about control over women, everything else is just a facade. They’re some of the least caring individuals towards children and mothers that you’ll ever meet.
Once you realise that the same people are gun fanatics and have little empathy for the victims that culture creates then the connection makes a lot of sense.
Ahhhh Murcah.
Never mind the kids that have already been born. They’re not important.
What a mess.
Take it he’s banning gun sales too or does he just hate women ?
@v39e84kK: yes.
@alan: TIL.
@v39e84kK: The pro life the gun owners prefer to kill them in the classroom.
@Tom Quin: Yes, quite right. All gun owners and those who believe in ones right to own a gun also love murdering children. Makes sense. There was a stabbing last week will you be handing over all your knives to the government? After all that must mean you love stabbing people?
Or we could say those are two quite separate issues and deal with just abortion.
@v39e84kK: Guns are machines that are designed with only one single purpose. That is to kill people.
Republicans can’t allow any unhinged lunatic uncontrolled access to them and then distance themselves from the inevitable consequences.
They say they cannot pass laws to control guns and the unhinged accessing them and shooting kids in schools, but they can pass laws to restrict a woman’s freedom of choice.
@Tom Quin: it’s funny because you simultaneously want to say abortion is good and not the murder of the unborn but you want to bitch at republicans for only caring about the life of the unborn children and not the victims of gun crime. It’s not logically consistent. I’m in favour of gun control but I find it hilarious how leftists want to say republicans only care about the unborn! But also those are just clumps of cells! It’s laughable.
@v39e84kK: When you accept millions in donations from the NRA and then stonewall legislation to bring in the most basic common sense gun control – like a background check before you can get an AR 15 …..all the while kids are being murdered in school, the actions actually show they care more about the money than the kids.
@v39e84kK: Pro-life people believe life begins at conception and some pro-choice people hold the ‘clump of cells’ viewpoint. You have just described two sides holding different views, what’s laughable about that? Isn’t that the essence of any debate? I’m trying to see if i missed something, but i can’t see the point you are trying to make.
@A$AP Ragnick: People are accusing the republicans of only caring about unborn life rather than school kids such as the victims here. But those making the accusations don’t believe the unborn have a right to life. Maybe I’m the only one who finds that a disingenuous argument?
I’m not against gun control generally.
@Pablo: both parties have NRA donations. Political donations are a cancer on US politics I agree. Are all “pro gun” arguments just NRA money based? No far from it, unless the NRA wrote and upheld the US constitution. The NRA Boogeyman is a simplistic argument.
Correct me if I am wrong but I believe one does need to pass a background check to get a legal gun in the US. For example I know a felon can’t get one. So I assume this guy passed the background right? So that didn’t work.
I think it’s weird we have two shooters in 10 days and hardly anyone is asking what went wrong here with these guys mental health?
@v39e84kK: There are no background checks required in Texas. So it’s quite possible no background check was ever carried out on this killer. With regards the NRA, there have been only two occasions when the NRA campaigned for stricter controls on who could obtain a gun and what types. Do you know when that was and the reasoning behind it?
Ffs America! And 73 million Americans are OK with this and having no gun law reforms. Nothing will ever change. It’s only going to get worse over there.
What a country. You can go down to the mall and buy weapons that can terminate multiple other lives in a second and yet you’re not allowed to take control of your own body. What type of people come up with these laws and then try to defend them..
Too bad they won’t get rid of guns to protect life
Religion is poison, when it’s adherents gain political advantage they can force others to conform to nothing more than their beliefs. It’s based on fear, control and coercion, not morality or empathy. It’s also a huge factor that underpins the gun problem in the USA.
@Maximus_Demonus: The religion of guns? What are you on about?
@v39e84kK: Religion is based on fear, fear of the unknown and fear of an imaginary bad guy. If you believe this BS, then you can believe you need an AR-15 to protect yourself from more bad guys. It’s ALL fear based.
@Maximus_Demonus: Uh. Yeah sure man.
@v39e84kK: Then explain why the USA is a complete basket case, what has lead to this emerging theocracy? Pretty soon they will have more in common with the Taliban than any democratic country.
So he’s very concerned about unborn babies but once they are born, there’s no protection for them against guns.
Making abortion illegal does not stop abortion. It just makes it extremely unsafe.
Wow Americans are so funny
This is what you get with Democracy. Personally I think this is great news because it will give people no choice but to face up to the issues and go out and vote for legislators who will legislate to retain the rights to an abortion. Calling this and similar laws anti women is ridiculous because half the people who vote for these right wing legislators are women and even if you disagree with them, they have the right, in a democracy to have their viewpoints. Our ire should be directed at those who avoid voting on the issue. The Republicans have outwitted the Democrats on this by framing the legislation in such a way that the Supreme court have no legal options, i.e./ e.g. States introduced the aspect of a civil case as opposed to a state case against abortion. Come November and the mid term elections, we will find out, how important this issue is to Americans and where it stands in their list of ‘ most important issues in the election’ and is America heading down the same road as the Taliban.If they are American men and WOMEN will be equally to ‘ blame’ but it is their Democracy. Please let’s not lower ourselves to the Taliban tones of the right. Let’s outwit them back.
have your say