New Alexandra Petri column about abortion rights

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:An unborn child (fetus) is a human. Change my mind.

No one is debating whether homo sapien fetuses are human. The debate is whether the rights of unborn humans who cannot viably live outside the womb trump the rights of the living females in whose wombs the fetuses reside.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An unborn child (fetus) is a human. Change my mind.

No one is debating whether homo sapien fetuses are human. The debate is whether the rights of unborn humans who cannot viably live outside the womb trump the rights of the living females in whose wombs the fetuses reside.

+1, and upon whose bodies they depend for sustenance and waste removal.

I really do think pro-lifers think the “womb” is some magical place where God himself nourishes the fetus to development. It’s an organ, people, and not a self-sustaining one. That’s some unmitigated undisputed science right there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An unborn child (fetus) is a human. Change my mind.

No one is debating whether homo sapien fetuses are human. The debate is whether the rights of unborn humans who cannot viably live outside the womb trump the rights of the living females in whose wombs the fetuses reside.

+1, and upon whose bodies they depend for sustenance and waste removal.

I really do think pro-lifers think the “womb” is some magical place where God himself nourishes the fetus to development. It’s an organ, people, and not a self-sustaining one. That’s some unmitigated undisputed science right there.

You’ve gone and used too many big words for knuckle dragging forced birthers to understand you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:An unborn child (fetus) is a human. Change my mind.

Unless you are one of the nine, nobody needs to change your opinion. The question is should your opinion dictate everyone else’s medical decisions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hit home for me too, OP. When I had my last kid, I had my tubes removed for this very reason. I have plenty of fertile years left, and I just couldn’t chance an oopsie pregnancy given the state of things.

As someone whose family members are going to need living organ donations, though, I really do look forward to the legal possibilities of a post-Roe world. If the state can force a woman to donate her heart, uterus and kidneys for 9 months to save a life, it can also force some pro-lifer to donate an O-Neg kidney or at least their blood to save lives. And if children and fetuses are now public goods, that’s all the ground we need to start rescuing children from their religious wacknut parents. If the Constitution doesn’t expressly provide a right to decide your own family, it certainly doesn’t provide a right to homeschool.

How is forcing you to not kill a life (with kidneys and heart and brain) the same as forcing you to remove one of your kidneys? I’m pro choice (up to a certain point) but this makes no sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hit home for me too, OP. When I had my last kid, I had my tubes removed for this very reason. I have plenty of fertile years left, and I just couldn’t chance an oopsie pregnancy given the state of things.

As someone whose family members are going to need living organ donations, though, I really do look forward to the legal possibilities of a post-Roe world. If the state can force a woman to donate her heart, uterus and kidneys for 9 months to save a life, it can also force some pro-lifer to donate an O-Neg kidney or at least their blood to save lives. And if children and fetuses are now public goods, that’s all the ground we need to start rescuing children from their religious wacknut parents. If the Constitution doesn’t expressly provide a right to decide your own family, it certainly doesn’t provide a right to homeschool.

How is forcing you to not kill a life (with kidneys and heart and brain) the same as forcing you to remove one of your kidneys? I’m pro choice (up to a certain point) but this makes no sense.

It’s giving up part of your body, perhaps against your will, for the benefit of another.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hit home for me too, OP. When I had my last kid, I had my tubes removed for this very reason. I have plenty of fertile years left, and I just couldn’t chance an oopsie pregnancy given the state of things.

As someone whose family members are going to need living organ donations, though, I really do look forward to the legal possibilities of a post-Roe world. If the state can force a woman to donate her heart, uterus and kidneys for 9 months to save a life, it can also force some pro-lifer to donate an O-Neg kidney or at least their blood to save lives. And if children and fetuses are now public goods, that’s all the ground we need to start rescuing children from their religious wacknut parents. If the Constitution doesn’t expressly provide a right to decide your own family, it certainly doesn’t provide a right to homeschool.

How is forcing you to not kill a life (with kidneys and heart and brain) the same as forcing you to remove one of your kidneys? I’m pro choice (up to a certain point) but this makes no sense.

Because the state will now have control of our bodies. What we want doesn't matter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:An unborn child (fetus) is a human. Change my mind.

Adult woman > unborn child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An unborn child (fetus) is a human. Change my mind.

No one is debating whether homo sapien fetuses are human. The debate is whether the rights of unborn humans who cannot viably live outside the womb trump the rights of the living females in whose wombs the fetuses reside.

If it’s just a matter of wombs, then soon abortion won’t be necessary. Soon we will be able to “transplant” a fetus into another woman who would like a child or incubate it until it can be adopted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An unborn child (fetus) is a human. Change my mind.

No one is debating whether homo sapien fetuses are human. The debate is whether the rights of unborn humans who cannot viably live outside the womb trump the rights of the living females in whose wombs the fetuses reside.

If it’s just a matter of wombs, then soon abortion won’t be necessary. Soon we will be able to “transplant” a fetus into another woman who would like a child or incubate it until it can be adopted.

Lol. No.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Deplorable that a bunch of white men, in the form of the Federalist Society, backed by billionaires, are on the cusp of stripping women in this country of their basic rights to control their own bodies.

Organized, well-funded misogyny.

A lot of white women are very involved in the federalist society and the anti abortion movement. The question is where is the democrat organization like the federalist society? Why didn’t the dems reform the court when they had the chance? I think it is people like you who take the simplistic argument that it is just white men doing this that makes it easy for everyone to throw up their hands and walk away. Look behind the white men and you will find the white women who support and vote for them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Deplorable that a bunch of white men, in the form of the Federalist Society, backed by billionaires, are on the cusp of stripping women in this country of their basic rights to control their own bodies.

Organized, well-funded misogyny.

A lot of white women are very involved in the federalist society and the anti abortion movement. The question is where is the democrat organization like the federalist society? Why didn’t the dems reform the court when they had the chance? I think it is people like you who take the simplistic argument that it is just white men doing this that makes it easy for everyone to throw up their hands and walk away. Look behind the white men and you will find the white women who support and vote for them.

Evidently you’re 12 and have never heard the phrase “internalized misogyny.”

And at what point have the Democrats had the numbers to “reform the courts”? When did that happen? McConnell wouldn’t even seat Obama’s judicial picks FFS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Deplorable that a bunch of white men, in the form of the Federalist Society, backed by billionaires, are on the cusp of stripping women in this country of their basic rights to control their own bodies.

Organized, well-funded misogyny.

A lot of white women are very involved in the federalist society and the anti abortion movement. The question is where is the democrat organization like the federalist society? Why didn’t the dems reform the court when they had the chance? I think it is people like you who take the simplistic argument that it is just white men doing this that makes it easy for everyone to throw up their hands and walk away. Look behind the white men and you will find the white women who support and vote for them.

Evidently you’re 12 and have never heard the phrase “internalized misogyny.”

And at what point have the Democrats had the numbers to “reform the courts”? When did that happen? McConnell wouldn’t even seat Obama’s judicial picks FFS.

Just can it. Oh we can not even try. It all about “internalized misogyny”. We can’t do this, we can’t do that. Why the f should anyone vote for you if you are not going to try? If the situation was reversed McConnell and the federalist would have reform the courts. I am tried if the incompetency of the dems and people like you talking about misogyny while embracing doing nothing because it is hard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An unborn child (fetus) is a human. Change my mind.

No one is debating whether homo sapien fetuses are human. The debate is whether the rights of unborn humans who cannot viably live outside the womb trump the rights of the living females in whose wombs the fetuses reside.

+1, and upon whose bodies they depend for sustenance and waste removal.

I really do think pro-lifers think the “womb” is some magical place where God himself nourishes the fetus to development. It’s an organ, people, and not a self-sustaining one. That’s some unmitigated undisputed science right there.

Basically it’s a parasite.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Deplorable that a bunch of white men, in the form of the Federalist Society, backed by billionaires, are on the cusp of stripping women in this country of their basic rights to control their own bodies.

Organized, well-funded misogyny.

A lot of white women are very involved in the federalist society and the anti abortion movement. The question is where is the democrat organization like the federalist society? Why didn’t the dems reform the court when they had the chance? I think it is people like you who take the simplistic argument that it is just white men doing this that makes it easy for everyone to throw up their hands and walk away. Look behind the white men and you will find the white women who support and vote for them.

Evidently you’re 12 and have never heard the phrase “internalized misogyny.”

And at what point have the Democrats had the numbers to “reform the courts”? When did that happen? McConnell wouldn’t even seat Obama’s judicial picks FFS.

Just can it. Oh we can not even try. It all about “internalized misogyny”. We can’t do this, we can’t do that. Why the f should anyone vote for you if you are not going to try? If the situation was reversed McConnell and the federalist would have reform the courts. I am tried if the incompetency of the dems and people like you talking about misogyny while embracing doing nothing because it is hard.

Try what, specifically? And we prefer legal, moral options, please.

Or maybe we do need to lie, cheat, and steal like the GOP…