Some U.S. students re-think college plans in states with abortion bans

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seems silly to blame colleges (and not apply to them) for government decision. Most of these colleges established over a century ago.

miss the point much? no one is blaming the colleges, they are simply not willing to subject themselves or their daughters to backwards, anti-women environments. Just so happens those colleges reside in backwards states. I assume that you yourself wouldn't want to a state with politics you vehemently disagree with, so these students are making the same decision. Tons of great colleges for all beliefs. No need to live in an environment that doesn't respect your rights.

Many people live in states where they don't agree with their politics (e.g. Florida). Part of the reason America is so divisive is because of people like you who seem to advocate for a divided country

Spoken like one who has never birthed a child. You do have any concept of the life altering nature of that? Permanent and significant...physically, mentally, emotionally, financially.....for ever and ever.

Overturning Roe is not disagreeable "politics". It is an assualt on fundamental rights.

Not sure what birthing a child has anything to do with this when we're talking about aborting a child. Instead of having a polite discussion, you seem to like to hurl insults. Some would argue that the unborn child also has rights too. You may not agree with that position and that's okay. Just try to sound like a rational human being. It's easy to be a jerk when you hide behind anonymity.

You don't know what the dangerous and life altering impacts of giving birth have to do with the catastrophic scotus decision to overturn roe? That sounds completely clueless.

Birthing and abortion are two different things. Look it up.

The right to abortion and the making of every other reproductive decision including having a child and intimately and obviously connected.

Birthing is the process or action of giving birth whereas abortion is the termination of a pregnancy so there is NO birth. It's not that complicated.

Have you ever even menstruated much less had a pregnanc or a miscarriage or infertility it any of dozens and dozens of other women's reproductive health issues? It is complicated...very.....get a clue

Don't even know what you are talking about. You sound crazed. Have a good day.

[Anonymous]

My concern for my niece is, what if your roommate begs you to drive her out of the state for an abortion or even emergency contraceptive after a date rape, are you going to say no? and then you could end up in prison. It feels akin to traveling to third world countries now, although at least in Brazil they ended up letting the 10 year old have the abortion unlike in South Dakota. It’s obviously a real concern. She was wary before but now is crossing the red states off her list.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You need to spend your dollars elsewhere, people.
Push for businesses to leave such states.
Lower their GDP.
Economic pressures have historically always worked best to change so-called "hearts and minds".

+1

I’m pulling my family and business out of VA if the GOP wins the general assembly.

Bold move. How will your kids and employees feel about a move?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How many abortions are these girls trying to get in the next four years?

Fair question.

The chance of being subject to a violent crime is much higher -- maybe students should spend more time pondering that.

Campus rape. Look into that. Brett kavanaugh types might be willing to settle for just assault and humiliation and there are predators out there that will not stop at that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who cares if they decide not to go to College X, Y, Z. They probably don’t need another liberal brainwashed anyways.

This os a dumb take that ignores the economic realities of higher education in 2022. There is a finite supply of parents of college age kids out there who are full pay, when full pay looks like $300k (or more per kid). Maybe the top 5-7% of the population. Top 10% is 200k HHI and That’s the donut hole. And conservative parents who can pay this amount often do not believe the brand name education or an OOS education is worth the high price tag. They often send their kids a tier down with merit or in state. The issue for a brand name school isn’t filling seats post Roe. It’s filling enough seats with full pay students, who effectively subsidize everyone else.

The problem with you take is that the parents you call “liberal brainwashed,” colleges call “highly coveted full pay” and “necessary to keep the light on”.

And on to this that the number of high school grads have peaked and the long anticipated college demographic cliff is coming. And yeah— some red state schools will have issues.

And I agree— it’s that the people of the state have elected people who have codified a second class citizenship status. It is degrading. Also, you send a kid to Wash U. She has an unplanned pregnancy. She comes home and you discuss this as a family and she decides to have an abortion in the DMV. She goes back to Wash U. Which is in a state with laws against leaving MO for an abortion. Congrats. Your kid is a felon. And you think MO wouldn’t love to make an example of a liberal college kid?

Off topic-- but how does that work? Kid is not technically domiciled in a red state, they are domiciled in their home state, attending college in the red state. With the exception of private colleges, they pay out of state tuition and are on their parents' tax returns. I understand that they have to follow the laws where they are attending college, while they are there---but can Missouri hold an out of state resident as a prisoner and prevent her from getting health care in her home state? That would make Missouri it's own country.

Who wants to spend all that time is Missouri regardless? They have one of the most draconian, anti women laws now out there. No thanks. Treat your women better Missouri.

We're talking about abortion. What specific draconian anti-women laws are you referring to?

Look up what is in place now in missouri. Horrible.

Please enlighten us and be specific.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seems silly to blame colleges (and not apply to them) for government decision. Most of these colleges established over a century ago.

miss the point much? no one is blaming the colleges, they are simply not willing to subject themselves or their daughters to backwards, anti-women environments. Just so happens those colleges reside in backwards states. I assume that you yourself wouldn't want to a state with politics you vehemently disagree with, so these students are making the same decision. Tons of great colleges for all beliefs. No need to live in an environment that doesn't respect your rights.

Many people live in states where they don't agree with their politics (e.g. Florida). Part of the reason America is so divisive is because of people like you who seem to advocate for a divided country

Spoken like one who has never birthed a child. You do have any concept of the life altering nature of that? Permanent and significant...physically, mentally, emotionally, financially.....for ever and ever.

Overturning Roe is not disagreeable "politics". It is an assualt on fundamental rights.

Not sure what birthing a child has anything to do with this when we're talking about aborting a child. Instead of having a polite discussion, you seem to like to hurl insults. Some would argue that the unborn child also has rights too. You may not agree with that position and that's okay. Just try to sound like a rational human being. It's easy to be a jerk when you hide behind anonymity.

You don't know what the dangerous and life altering impacts of giving birth have to do with the catastrophic scotus decision to overturn roe? That sounds completely clueless.

Birthing and abortion are two different things. Look it up.

The right to abortion and the making of every other reproductive decision including having a child and intimately and obviously connected.

Birthing is the process or action of giving birth whereas abortion is the termination of a pregnancy so there is NO birth. It's not that complicated.

Have you ever even menstruated much less had a pregnanc or a miscarriage or infertility it any of dozens and dozens of other women's reproductive health issues? It is complicated...very.....get a clue

Don't even know what you are talking about. You sound crazed. Have a good day.

You sound ignorant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who cares if they decide not to go to College X, Y, Z. They probably don’t need another liberal brainwashed anyways.

This os a dumb take that ignores the economic realities of higher education in 2022. There is a finite supply of parents of college age kids out there who are full pay, when full pay looks like $300k (or more per kid). Maybe the top 5-7% of the population. Top 10% is 200k HHI and That’s the donut hole. And conservative parents who can pay this amount often do not believe the brand name education or an OOS education is worth the high price tag. They often send their kids a tier down with merit or in state. The issue for a brand name school isn’t filling seats post Roe. It’s filling enough seats with full pay students, who effectively subsidize everyone else.

The problem with you take is that the parents you call “liberal brainwashed,” colleges call “highly coveted full pay” and “necessary to keep the light on”.

And on to this that the number of high school grads have peaked and the long anticipated college demographic cliff is coming. And yeah— some red state schools will have issues.

And I agree— it’s that the people of the state have elected people who have codified a second class citizenship status. It is degrading. Also, you send a kid to Wash U. She has an unplanned pregnancy. She comes home and you discuss this as a family and she decides to have an abortion in the DMV. She goes back to Wash U. Which is in a state with laws against leaving MO for an abortion. Congrats. Your kid is a felon. And you think MO wouldn’t love to make an example of a liberal college kid?

Off topic-- but how does that work? Kid is not technically domiciled in a red state, they are domiciled in their home state, attending college in the red state. With the exception of private colleges, they pay out of state tuition and are on their parents' tax returns. I understand that they have to follow the laws where they are attending college, while they are there---but can Missouri hold an out of state resident as a prisoner and prevent her from getting health care in her home state? That would make Missouri it's own country.

Who wants to spend all that time is Missouri regardless? They have one of the most draconian, anti women laws now out there. No thanks. Treat your women better Missouri.

We're talking about abortion. What specific draconian anti-women laws are you referring to?

Look up what is in place now in missouri. Horrible.

Please enlighten us and be specific.

Kansas City Star

Abortion banned in Missouri as trigger law takes effect, following Supreme Court ruling

BY JONATHAN SHORMAN UPDATED JULY 06, 2022 7:20 AM

No exceptions for rape or incest.

Took all of 4 seconds to google the bad news for missouri women or those of any other Gilead state.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who cares if they decide not to go to College X, Y, Z. They probably don’t need another liberal brainwashed anyways.

This os a dumb take that ignores the economic realities of higher education in 2022. There is a finite supply of parents of college age kids out there who are full pay, when full pay looks like $300k (or more per kid). Maybe the top 5-7% of the population. Top 10% is 200k HHI and That’s the donut hole. And conservative parents who can pay this amount often do not believe the brand name education or an OOS education is worth the high price tag. They often send their kids a tier down with merit or in state. The issue for a brand name school isn’t filling seats post Roe. It’s filling enough seats with full pay students, who effectively subsidize everyone else.

The problem with you take is that the parents you call “liberal brainwashed,” colleges call “highly coveted full pay” and “necessary to keep the light on”.

And on to this that the number of high school grads have peaked and the long anticipated college demographic cliff is coming. And yeah— some red state schools will have issues.

And I agree— it’s that the people of the state have elected people who have codified a second class citizenship status. It is degrading. Also, you send a kid to Wash U. She has an unplanned pregnancy. She comes home and you discuss this as a family and she decides to have an abortion in the DMV. She goes back to Wash U. Which is in a state with laws against leaving MO for an abortion. Congrats. Your kid is a felon. And you think MO wouldn’t love to make an example of a liberal college kid?

Off topic-- but how does that work? Kid is not technically domiciled in a red state, they are domiciled in their home state, attending college in the red state. With the exception of private colleges, they pay out of state tuition and are on their parents' tax returns. I understand that they have to follow the laws where they are attending college, while they are there---but can Missouri hold an out of state resident as a prisoner and prevent her from getting health care in her home state? That would make Missouri it's own country.

From a Constitutional Law perspective, there is a right (written in the Constitution!) to interstate travel. And states must give full faith and credit to laws of other states. A ban on women, or a certain class of women, leaving the state to engage in behavior that is legal in another state is also flat out illegal from an equal protection standpoint. The right is just following the same playbook they used for gay marriage and trying to use scare tactics to pressure women. For example, gambling in casinos may be illegal in your state. But you can’t be charged with a crime. For going to Vegas.

As for residency, that is always tricky for college kids. Some states would count them as residents because they spend 51% of the time in the state. Some states put up a lot of hoops because in state tuition may be at issue. In general, don’t have your kid change voter registration, get a drivers license, or register a car in the red state. It’s not always a choice, but it’s better if they don’t pay taxes in the state, or if they also do some work in their home state. It’s best if they can find a way around signing a lease. It’s a multi factorial analysis. But in VA at least, signing a lease I’d a big piece, and drivers license, voting, car registration and work/taxation are also considered.

pp here-- I did some reading about this and agree it seems unlikely that travel bans will work from a legal or practical standpoint...if states can prevent women from leaving the state, it's basically Gilead in those states.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who cares if they decide not to go to College X, Y, Z. They probably don’t need another liberal brainwashed anyways.

This os a dumb take that ignores the economic realities of higher education in 2022. There is a finite supply of parents of college age kids out there who are full pay, when full pay looks like $300k (or more per kid). Maybe the top 5-7% of the population. Top 10% is 200k HHI and That’s the donut hole. And conservative parents who can pay this amount often do not believe the brand name education or an OOS education is worth the high price tag. They often send their kids a tier down with merit or in state. The issue for a brand name school isn’t filling seats post Roe. It’s filling enough seats with full pay students, who effectively subsidize everyone else.

The problem with you take is that the parents you call “liberal brainwashed,” colleges call “highly coveted full pay” and “necessary to keep the light on”.

And on to this that the number of high school grads have peaked and the long anticipated college demographic cliff is coming. And yeah— some red state schools will have issues.

And I agree— it’s that the people of the state have elected people who have codified a second class citizenship status. It is degrading. Also, you send a kid to Wash U. She has an unplanned pregnancy. She comes home and you discuss this as a family and she decides to have an abortion in the DMV. She goes back to Wash U. Which is in a state with laws against leaving MO for an abortion. Congrats. Your kid is a felon. And you think MO wouldn’t love to make an example of a liberal college kid?

Off topic-- but how does that work? Kid is not technically domiciled in a red state, they are domiciled in their home state, attending college in the red state. With the exception of private colleges, they pay out of state tuition and are on their parents' tax returns. I understand that they have to follow the laws where they are attending college, while they are there---but can Missouri hold an out of state resident as a prisoner and prevent her from getting health care in her home state? That would make Missouri it's own country.

Yes, this is a good point. Thing is, a lot of blue-state students get domiciled in the state in which they’re attending college so that they can vote to try to flip the red state blue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who cares if they decide not to go to College X, Y, Z. They probably don’t need another liberal brainwashed anyways.

This os a dumb take that ignores the economic realities of higher education in 2022. There is a finite supply of parents of college age kids out there who are full pay, when full pay looks like $300k (or more per kid). Maybe the top 5-7% of the population. Top 10% is 200k HHI and That’s the donut hole. And conservative parents who can pay this amount often do not believe the brand name education or an OOS education is worth the high price tag. They often send their kids a tier down with merit or in state. The issue for a brand name school isn’t filling seats post Roe. It’s filling enough seats with full pay students, who effectively subsidize everyone else.

The problem with you take is that the parents you call “liberal brainwashed,” colleges call “highly coveted full pay” and “necessary to keep the light on”.

And on to this that the number of high school grads have peaked and the long anticipated college demographic cliff is coming. And yeah— some red state schools will have issues.

And I agree— it’s that the people of the state have elected people who have codified a second class citizenship status. It is degrading. Also, you send a kid to Wash U. She has an unplanned pregnancy. She comes home and you discuss this as a family and she decides to have an abortion in the DMV. She goes back to Wash U. Which is in a state with laws against leaving MO for an abortion. Congrats. Your kid is a felon. And you think MO wouldn’t love to make an example of a liberal college kid?

Off topic-- but how does that work? Kid is not technically domiciled in a red state, they are domiciled in their home state, attending college in the red state. With the exception of private colleges, they pay out of state tuition and are on their parents' tax returns. I understand that they have to follow the laws where they are attending college, while they are there---but can Missouri hold an out of state resident as a prisoner and prevent her from getting health care in her home state? That would make Missouri it's own country.

From a Constitutional Law perspective, there is a right (written in the Constitution!) to interstate travel. And states must give full faith and credit to laws of other states. A ban on women, or a certain class of women, leaving the state to engage in behavior that is legal in another state is also flat out illegal from an equal protection standpoint. The right is just following the same playbook they used for gay marriage and trying to use scare tactics to pressure women. For example, gambling in casinos may be illegal in your state. But you can’t be charged with a crime. For going to Vegas.

As for residency, that is always tricky for college kids. Some states would count them as residents because they spend 51% of the time in the state. Some states put up a lot of hoops because in state tuition may be at issue. In general, don’t have your kid change voter registration, get a drivers license, or register a car in the red state. It’s not always a choice, but it’s better if they don’t pay taxes in the state, or if they also do some work in their home state. It’s best if they can find a way around signing a lease. It’s a multi factorial analysis. But in VA at least, signing a lease I’d a big piece, and drivers license, voting, car registration and work/taxation are also considered.

pp here-- I did some reading about this and agree it seems unlikely that travel bans will work from a legal or practical standpoint...if states can prevent women from leaving the state, it's basically Gilead in those states.

"Under 18 U.S.C. § 2423, transporting a minor across state lines is a crime when done with the purpose to engage in illegal sex or child pornography: (a) Transportation with intent to engage in criminal sexual activity."

If a fetus is a person is a minor, and you are transporting it across state lines to illegally abort it.... I don't think it's going to be too hard to stretch existing laws about transporting people across state lines to include abortion.

But sure, no problem. Nothing to worry about

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who cares if they decide not to go to College X, Y, Z. They probably don’t need another liberal brainwashed anyways.

This os a dumb take that ignores the economic realities of higher education in 2022. There is a finite supply of parents of college age kids out there who are full pay, when full pay looks like $300k (or more per kid). Maybe the top 5-7% of the population. Top 10% is 200k HHI and That’s the donut hole. And conservative parents who can pay this amount often do not believe the brand name education or an OOS education is worth the high price tag. They often send their kids a tier down with merit or in state. The issue for a brand name school isn’t filling seats post Roe. It’s filling enough seats with full pay students, who effectively subsidize everyone else.

The problem with you take is that the parents you call “liberal brainwashed,” colleges call “highly coveted full pay” and “necessary to keep the light on”.

And on to this that the number of high school grads have peaked and the long anticipated college demographic cliff is coming. And yeah— some red state schools will have issues.

And I agree— it’s that the people of the state have elected people who have codified a second class citizenship status. It is degrading. Also, you send a kid to Wash U. She has an unplanned pregnancy. She comes home and you discuss this as a family and she decides to have an abortion in the DMV. She goes back to Wash U. Which is in a state with laws against leaving MO for an abortion. Congrats. Your kid is a felon. And you think MO wouldn’t love to make an example of a liberal college kid?

Off topic-- but how does that work? Kid is not technically domiciled in a red state, they are domiciled in their home state, attending college in the red state. With the exception of private colleges, they pay out of state tuition and are on their parents' tax returns. I understand that they have to follow the laws where they are attending college, while they are there---but can Missouri hold an out of state resident as a prisoner and prevent her from getting health care in her home state? That would make Missouri it's own country.

From a Constitutional Law perspective, there is a right (written in the Constitution!) to interstate travel. And states must give full faith and credit to laws of other states. A ban on women, or a certain class of women, leaving the state to engage in behavior that is legal in another state is also flat out illegal from an equal protection standpoint. The right is just following the same playbook they used for gay marriage and trying to use scare tactics to pressure women. For example, gambling in casinos may be illegal in your state. But you can’t be charged with a crime. For going to Vegas.

As for residency, that is always tricky for college kids. Some states would count them as residents because they spend 51% of the time in the state. Some states put up a lot of hoops because in state tuition may be at issue. In general, don’t have your kid change voter registration, get a drivers license, or register a car in the red state. It’s not always a choice, but it’s better if they don’t pay taxes in the state, or if they also do some work in their home state. It’s best if they can find a way around signing a lease. It’s a multi factorial analysis. But in VA at least, signing a lease I’d a big piece, and drivers license, voting, car registration and work/taxation are also considered.

pp here-- I did some reading about this and agree it seems unlikely that travel bans will work from a legal or practical standpoint...if states can prevent women from leaving the state, it's basically Gilead in those states.

"Under 18 U.S.C. § 2423, transporting a minor across state lines is a crime when done with the purpose to engage in illegal sex or child pornography: (a) Transportation with intent to engage in criminal sexual activity."

If a fetus is a person is a minor, and you are transporting it across state lines to illegally abort it.... I don't think it's going to be too hard to stretch existing laws about transporting people across state lines to include abortion.

But sure, no problem. Nothing to worry about

A fetus is a person in one state and then step into another state and a fetus is a fetus. What a ridiculous situation.

Vote to get our scotus back and our rights back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who cares if they decide not to go to College X, Y, Z. They probably don’t need another liberal brainwashed anyways.

This os a dumb take that ignores the economic realities of higher education in 2022. There is a finite supply of parents of college age kids out there who are full pay, when full pay looks like $300k (or more per kid). Maybe the top 5-7% of the population. Top 10% is 200k HHI and That’s the donut hole. And conservative parents who can pay this amount often do not believe the brand name education or an OOS education is worth the high price tag. They often send their kids a tier down with merit or in state. The issue for a brand name school isn’t filling seats post Roe. It’s filling enough seats with full pay students, who effectively subsidize everyone else.

The problem with you take is that the parents you call “liberal brainwashed,” colleges call “highly coveted full pay” and “necessary to keep the light on”.

And on to this that the number of high school grads have peaked and the long anticipated college demographic cliff is coming. And yeah— some red state schools will have issues.

And I agree— it’s that the people of the state have elected people who have codified a second class citizenship status. It is degrading. Also, you send a kid to Wash U. She has an unplanned pregnancy. She comes home and you discuss this as a family and she decides to have an abortion in the DMV. She goes back to Wash U. Which is in a state with laws against leaving MO for an abortion. Congrats. Your kid is a felon. And you think MO wouldn’t love to make an example of a liberal college kid?

Off topic-- but how does that work? Kid is not technically domiciled in a red state, they are domiciled in their home state, attending college in the red state. With the exception of private colleges, they pay out of state tuition and are on their parents' tax returns. I understand that they have to follow the laws where they are attending college, while they are there---but can Missouri hold an out of state resident as a prisoner and prevent her from getting health care in her home state? That would make Missouri it's own country.

From a Constitutional Law perspective, there is a right (written in the Constitution!) to interstate travel. And states must give full faith and credit to laws of other states. A ban on women, or a certain class of women, leaving the state to engage in behavior that is legal in another state is also flat out illegal from an equal protection standpoint. The right is just following the same playbook they used for gay marriage and trying to use scare tactics to pressure women. For example, gambling in casinos may be illegal in your state. But you can’t be charged with a crime. For going to Vegas.

As for residency, that is always tricky for college kids. Some states would count them as residents because they spend 51% of the time in the state. Some states put up a lot of hoops because in state tuition may be at issue. In general, don’t have your kid change voter registration, get a drivers license, or register a car in the red state. It’s not always a choice, but it’s better if they don’t pay taxes in the state, or if they also do some work in their home state. It’s best if they can find a way around signing a lease. It’s a multi factorial analysis. But in VA at least, signing a lease I’d a big piece, and drivers license, voting, car registration and work/taxation are also considered.

pp here-- I did some reading about this and agree it seems unlikely that travel bans will work from a legal or practical standpoint...if states can prevent women from leaving the state, it's basically Gilead in those states.

"Under 18 U.S.C. § 2423, transporting a minor across state lines is a crime when done with the purpose to engage in illegal sex or child pornography: (a) Transportation with intent to engage in criminal sexual activity."

If a fetus is a person is a minor, and you are transporting it across state lines to illegally abort it.... I don't think it's going to be too hard to stretch existing laws about transporting people across state lines to include abortion.

But sure, no problem. Nothing to worry about

pp here-- interesting point, but if Missouri consider a fetus a "minor" and Colorado considers it a fetus...I don't think it holds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"The U.S. Supreme Court's decision in June to overturn the 1973 Roe v. Wade case that legalized abortion nationwide has some students rethinking their higher education plans as states rush to ban or curtail abortion, according to interviews with 20 students and college advisers across the country.

For some students, the restrictions raise fears that they won't be able to get an abortion if they need one or that they will face discrimination for gender differences. Others said they worried about facing racial prejudice or being politically ostracized.

"I'm only in high school right now, and I'm still finding out who I am," said Samira Murad, 17, who will be a senior this fall at Stuyvesant High School in New York. "I don't want to move somewhere I can't be myself because of laws put in place."

It is too soon to determine whether such concerns will affect admissions in a measurable way, and evidence from other recent divisive state laws suggests there may be little overall impact.

But in the wake of Roe's overturn, college counselors said abortion has figured prominently in many conversations with clients, with some going as far as nixing their dream schools."

Kristen Willmott, a counselor with Top Tier Admissions in Massachusetts, said students she works with have told her they are taking some top schools in Texas, Florida and Tennessee off their application lists due to their restrictive abortion laws.

Alexis Prisco, who is entering her senior year at Eastern Technical High School in Maryland, had planned to apply to her parents' alma mater, Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri."

https://news.yahoo.com/u-students-think-college-plans-101417689.html

What the hell? I'm pro-choice but that quote is insanity. Abortion is not birth control. Someone please inform this girl of that.

This Stuy student cannot be herself because her right to an abortion is not constitutionally protected in certain states?!!!

the article is about lgbtq rights too.

What states ban LGBTQ rights?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How many abortions are these girls trying to get in the next four years?

+1000

If this was my DD's biggest concern in choosing a college, I would consider myself a massive failure as her mother.

Meanwhile, please tell your smart DD's to go right ahead and take Duke, Emory, Rice etc off of their lists!!! My rising HS junior DD would be delighted not to have the competition from these pious fools.

My daughter’s - and son’s - big concern is the treatment of women. And the attack on their personal liberties.

You want your kids to sit back while human rights are being attacked? Sounds like bad parenting.

What about the future women whose lives are now being saved? You don't care at all about them? Sounds like bad parenting to me.

You mean the unwanted fetuses?

That is beyond sick to force women to give birth to children they don’t want.

Every child deserves to be wanted.

Wow. I truly hope you are not a parent. Anyone who refers to "unwanted fetuses" has a screw or two loose.

Banning abortion doesn’t suddenly make all of those fetuses wanted.

You are forcing women to give birth to these unwanted fetuses. You aren’t “saving” them. You’re condemning them to a life of being unwanted.

This is so offensive it's hard to imagine it was posted by a grown woman. I have DC that have come out of my vagina and one that's adopted. My adopted DC was never unwanted -- his parents were too young to care for him. I know a lot of parents with adopted DC. They are not doomed to a life of being unwanted. What an idiotic thing to say.

I am pro-choice but I find so much of the pro-choice argument to be repulsive. This one is a first, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seems silly to blame colleges (and not apply to them) for government decision. Most of these colleges established over a century ago.

miss the point much? no one is blaming the colleges, they are simply not willing to subject themselves or their daughters to backwards, anti-women environments. Just so happens those colleges reside in backwards states. I assume that you yourself wouldn't want to a state with politics you vehemently disagree with, so these students are making the same decision. Tons of great colleges for all beliefs. No need to live in an environment that doesn't respect your rights.

Many people live in states where they don't agree with their politics (e.g. Florida). Part of the reason America is so divisive is because of people like you who seem to advocate for a divided country

Spoken like one who has never birthed a child. You do have any concept of the life altering nature of that? Permanent and significant...physically, mentally, emotionally, financially.....for ever and ever.

Overturning Roe is not disagreeable "politics". It is an assualt on fundamental rights.

Not sure what birthing a child has anything to do with this when we're talking about aborting a child. Instead of having a polite discussion, you seem to like to hurl insults. Some would argue that the unborn child also has rights too. You may not agree with that position and that's okay. Just try to sound like a rational human being. It's easy to be a jerk when you hide behind anonymity.

You don't know what the dangerous and life altering impacts of giving birth have to do with the catastrophic scotus decision to overturn roe? That sounds completely clueless.

Birthing and abortion are two different things. Look it up.

The right to abortion and the making of every other reproductive decision including having a child and intimately and obviously connected.

Birthing is the process or action of giving birth whereas abortion is the termination of a pregnancy so there is NO birth. It's not that complicated.

Have you ever even menstruated much less had a pregnanc or a miscarriage or infertility it any of dozens and dozens of other women's reproductive health issues? It is complicated...very.....get a clue

Don't even know what you are talking about. You sound crazed. Have a good day.

Stay out of reproductive discussions if you are totally clueless.