Abortion messaging needs to change

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, DCUM can’t see the point you are making because you said you were a Christian and then they all went blind with rage.

I think you’re right about that. Apparently’ they think freedom of religion applies to everyone except Christians.

Freedom of religion also means that I am free from the influence of YOUR religion as well. Jewish law states that life does not begin at conception, it begins at birth. Why should Christianity overrule Judaism?

Again, Christians can have freedom of religion- they don't have to get abortions. Your religion does NOT get to dictate what others do.

Yep, and that’s exact why the fourth sentence of my original post says that I am not asking anyone to agree with me. That is why I have repeatedly said that I think abortion should be legal for all because we all have such varying views.

Nope. Each state can decide for themselves if they want to have abortion restrictions and at one point. It’s not for some New Yorker to decide what the voters of Alabama want to do about abortion. Don’t like it? Move.

Nope. What I choose to do with my body and uterus is a fundamental right. You can't "states rights" away fundamental rights. See slavery.

You say that, but the law disagrees with you. Sorry!

The law changes. Sorry! Women will get their rights back

The law can absolutely change! There are mechanisms for this. At the federal level, you can push for a constitutional amendment. Good luck getting the states you need for that. And then there’s the state level. By all means, convince the people in deep red states that they should have elective abortions through the third trimester.

The good news is that there aren’t “elective” third trimester (that’s 27 weeks for those ignorant about pregnancy) abortions. So no one needs to go around convincing anyone of that.

But don’t you worry. At some point after some republicans’ daughters or wives have died because of abortion bans then the pendulum will swing back. One can only hope n

Elective abortion in the third trimester are rare but they do happen. Published medical studies on the reasons show it can be due to delays in seeking abortion care, finances, issues with the man in question but yes they do happen.

Third trimester elective abortions? Like hell those happen.

The medical literature is out there. Here is one example.

Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2022 Jun; 54(2): 38–45. Published online 2022 Apr 10. doi: 10.1363/psrh.12190

“Veronica, a 21‐year‐old Latina woman in the South, also did not realize she was pregnant until she was in the third trimester of pregnancy. Veronica was dating someone new and wanted to get tested for sexually transmitted infections before commencing a sexual relationship with this man. The clinic also ran a pregnancy test, which was positive. Veronica was shocked. She explained that she had no recognizable pregnancy symptoms and had been having a regular period: “It seemed to me like regular periods because it lasted the same amount of time that they would usually last […] and I never got morning sickness. I wasn't lethargic.” Veronica was immediately clear that she did not want to continue the pregnancy and took the first available abortion appointment at the clinic. When Veronica presented for her abortion appointment, the ultrasound worker determined that she was 25 weeks pregnant. Veronica needed an abortion in the third trimester because the fact that she was pregnant was new information to her when she was already 25 weeks pregnant.“

Now put the link to the website where you found that, forced birther.

Can you read? It’s in my post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am the OP and I regret starting this thread because, as a democrat, I am so embarrassed by most of the responses. To any moderates or undecided voters out there, please know that this thread in no know represents the views and attitude of most democrats. Most democrats I know in real life truly enjoy conversations with people of differing viewpoints and perspectives.

For those of you still struggling to find my point, it is this:

Democrats could expand their reach by extending their message to voters whose views on abortion are more moderate. They could state that abortion should be legal, safe, and rare so that every woman can make the choice that suits her.

At no point did I say that abortion decisions based on lifestyle should be illegal. I guess you were confused because I stated that it is not in line with my values. Here’s what I think the problem might be. As a society, we have come to equate our own values with what the law should be. So when I said that I am not in favor of abortion based solely on lifestyle, you assumed I wanted it to be illegal. It is possible to have your own set of values, your own religious beliefs, and advocate for your beliefs without forcing them on anyone or trying to make them the law.

I did not assume you thought “lifestyle” abortions should be illegal, but that you personally judged them in a different way, and I believe that is morally inconsistent on your part. After all, abortion is not murder, then what is it? If it is nothing at all, then why is a “lifestyle” abortion any different than getting your hair cut? Why even talk about it? Specifically, what are “your values” that a “lifestyle” abortion is not consistent with?

You had no right to assume I would judge others for their decision. You might be shocked to know that people can sit back and watch others make decisions they would not make for themselves without judging them!

Then why even mention it?

Because OP is engaging in some next level concern trolling.

You do realize OP isn’t the only one responding here, don’t you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's the thing with abortion as a "lifestyle choice". Things happen.

Birth control fails.

Sometimes the circumstances after we get pregnant change and it is no longer a good option to have a baby, ie: the father leaves, job loss, etc.

Also, we are humans, mistakes happen, and there are some women who just do not have the capacity to raise a child.

Either way, as a Christian, the Bible tells us, "Judge not, that ye be not judged."

Abortion laws should not be determined based on who should have one and who shouldn't. It makes every women go through some sort of test as to whether or not she should be allowed to have an abortion. This is already a devastating situation for women to walk into an abortion clinic or hospital, and to have that extra layer of trauma is just cruel. Just let women live their lives.

Yep, which is why I have repeatedly said that abortion should be legal, safe, and rare.

You seem to be in favor of lifestyle abortions. Im not, but I respect your right to make your own choice. Which is why the law should allow for each of us to make our own choice.

But the democrats don’t want abortion to be rare, and they oppose the Hyde amendment so they want you to pay for it.

You’re misinformed and deliberately obtuse. And this is why people are getting indignant with you OP. It’s almost as if you’re concern trolling.

Democrats dropped the rare wording and have continually sought to drop the Hyde amendment but such attempts were thwarted. Where exactly do you get your news from? Try widening your media outlets to keep updated.

Here’s Vox on the pressure to drop the “rare” wording

https://www.vox.com/2019/10/18/20917406/abortion-safe-legal-and-rare-tulsi-gabbard

Here’s NPR on just one of Biden’s attempts to drop Hyde

https://www.npr.org/2021/05/31/1001881788/bidens-budget-proposal-reverses-a-decades-long-ban-on-abortion-funding

From your article:
“During the lead up to the 2020 Democratic presidential primary, Biden reversed his longtime position on Hyde, joining other Deocratic hopefuls in saying he would work to overturn it.

“If I believe healthcare is a right, as I do, I can no longer support an amendment that makes that right dependent on someone’s zip code,” Biden said in June 2019.”

My god, the horror. The horror.

As to your 2019 article: “But over the years, abortion rights advocates have pushed back against the phrase. “Safe, legal, and rare” implies that getting an abortion is something that “you should be apologetic for,” reproductive justice activist Renee Bracey Sherman told Vox. “It places the blame on the person who’s had an abortion, as if they just did something wrong to need one, rather than addressing the systemic issue as to why someone might not be able to have access to consistent health care or contraception.””

Nah, better just to make sure health care is dependent on where in the United States of America a woman lives and we should probably start shaming women for abortion more, too.

Was this some sort of attempt to backtrack from accusing me of being misinformed? If so, it fails. I told you democrats have pulled away from the “rare” wording and I also said they have pushed to do away with Hyde, and provided the receipts.

You posted those in reply to one person. And I’m here to say that if I have to pay for your husband’s ED meds, you should have to pay for a woman’s abortion. Them’s the breaks.

And as to rare: I think it was a thing Bill Clinton said thirty years ago. I think the GOP’s tack of making women’s health care illegal is far dumber than politicians moving away from the word “rare.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Abortion after a certain set of weeks is murder.

Also, we need to be fair. If a woman can abort her child and kill her baby, men should be able to sign over their rights and walk away completely too.

If a woman wants to kill her baby and the man wants to keep it, he has no recourse. That happened to me. I would have taken full custody but she decided murder was the best route.

If a man wants to walk away he's under the financial burden for 18+ years. He can even go to jail for not paying.

So if you want to kill your babies then men should be able to walk away from them too. The other solution is both parties agree to killing the child. If father doesn't want to he gets to take the child and the mother signs away rights.

Otherwise as it stands, it shows women are incapable of complex decisions because they can abort a "mistake" or keep the "mistake" and the man is on the hook.

Men impregnate but are not pregnant. They do not go through nine months of pregnancy and all that pregnancy entails and until they are actually pregnant then they get no say in what a woman chooses.

So why can't men be off the hook financially? Why is it ok for the woman to be completely off the hook by choosing abortion but no way for the man to get off the hook?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, DCUM can’t see the point you are making because you said you were a Christian and then they all went blind with rage.

I think you’re right about that. Apparently’ they think freedom of religion applies to everyone except Christians.

Freedom of religion also means that I am free from the influence of YOUR religion as well. Jewish law states that life does not begin at conception, it begins at birth. Why should Christianity overrule Judaism?

Again, Christians can have freedom of religion- they don't have to get abortions. Your religion does NOT get to dictate what others do.

Yep, and that’s exact why the fourth sentence of my original post says that I am not asking anyone to agree with me. That is why I have repeatedly said that I think abortion should be legal for all because we all have such varying views.

Nope. Each state can decide for themselves if they want to have abortion restrictions and at one point. It’s not for some New Yorker to decide what the voters of Alabama want to do about abortion. Don’t like it? Move.

Nope. What I choose to do with my body and uterus is a fundamental right. You can't "states rights" away fundamental rights. See slavery.

You say that, but the law disagrees with you. Sorry!

The law changes. Sorry! Women will get their rights back

The law can absolutely change! There are mechanisms for this. At the federal level, you can push for a constitutional amendment. Good luck getting the states you need for that. And then there’s the state level. By all means, convince the people in deep red states that they should have elective abortions through the third trimester.

The good news is that there aren’t “elective” third trimester (that’s 27 weeks for those ignorant about pregnancy) abortions. So no one needs to go around convincing anyone of that.

But don’t you worry. At some point after some republicans’ daughters or wives have died because of abortion bans then the pendulum will swing back. One can only hope n

Elective abortion in the third trimester are rare but they do happen. Published medical studies on the reasons show it can be due to delays in seeking abortion care, finances, issues with the man in question but yes they do happen.

Third trimester elective abortions? Like hell those happen.

The medical literature is out there. Here is one example.

Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2022 Jun; 54(2): 38–45. Published online 2022 Apr 10. doi: 10.1363/psrh.12190

“Veronica, a 21‐year‐old Latina woman in the South, also did not realize she was pregnant until she was in the third trimester of pregnancy. Veronica was dating someone new and wanted to get tested for sexually transmitted infections before commencing a sexual relationship with this man. The clinic also ran a pregnancy test, which was positive. Veronica was shocked. She explained that she had no recognizable pregnancy symptoms and had been having a regular period: “It seemed to me like regular periods because it lasted the same amount of time that they would usually last […] and I never got morning sickness. I wasn't lethargic.” Veronica was immediately clear that she did not want to continue the pregnancy and took the first available abortion appointment at the clinic. When Veronica presented for her abortion appointment, the ultrasound worker determined that she was 25 weeks pregnant. Veronica needed an abortion in the third trimester because the fact that she was pregnant was new information to her when she was already 25 weeks pregnant.“

Now put the link to the website where you found that, forced birther.

Can you read? It’s in my post.

No, the link to the website where you found it. I should let you know that I already know where you got it, I just want you to out yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's the thing with abortion as a "lifestyle choice". Things happen.

Birth control fails.

Sometimes the circumstances after we get pregnant change and it is no longer a good option to have a baby, ie: the father leaves, job loss, etc.

Also, we are humans, mistakes happen, and there are some women who just do not have the capacity to raise a child.

Either way, as a Christian, the Bible tells us, "Judge not, that ye be not judged."

Abortion laws should not be determined based on who should have one and who shouldn't. It makes every women go through some sort of test as to whether or not she should be allowed to have an abortion. This is already a devastating situation for women to walk into an abortion clinic or hospital, and to have that extra layer of trauma is just cruel. Just let women live their lives.

Yep, which is why I have repeatedly said that abortion should be legal, safe, and rare.

You seem to be in favor of lifestyle abortions. Im not, but I respect your right to make your own choice. Which is why the law should allow for each of us to make our own choice.

But the democrats don’t want abortion to be rare, and they oppose the Hyde amendment so they want you to pay for it.

You’re misinformed and deliberately obtuse. And this is why people are getting indignant with you OP. It’s almost as if you’re concern trolling.

Democrats dropped the rare wording and have continually sought to drop the Hyde amendment but such attempts were thwarted. Where exactly do you get your news from? Try widening your media outlets to keep updated.

Here’s Vox on the pressure to drop the “rare” wording

https://www.vox.com/2019/10/18/20917406/abortion-safe-legal-and-rare-tulsi-gabbard

Here’s NPR on just one of Biden’s attempts to drop Hyde

https://www.npr.org/2021/05/31/1001881788/bidens-budget-proposal-reverses-a-decades-long-ban-on-abortion-funding

From your article:
“During the lead up to the 2020 Democratic presidential primary, Biden reversed his longtime position on Hyde, joining other Deocratic hopefuls in saying he would work to overturn it.

“If I believe healthcare is a right, as I do, I can no longer support an amendment that makes that right dependent on someone’s zip code,” Biden said in June 2019.”

My god, the horror. The horror.

As to your 2019 article: “But over the years, abortion rights advocates have pushed back against the phrase. “Safe, legal, and rare” implies that getting an abortion is something that “you should be apologetic for,” reproductive justice activist Renee Bracey Sherman told Vox. “It places the blame on the person who’s had an abortion, as if they just did something wrong to need one, rather than addressing the systemic issue as to why someone might not be able to have access to consistent health care or contraception.””

Nah, better just to make sure health care is dependent on where in the United States of America a woman lives and we should probably start shaming women for abortion more, too.

Was this some sort of attempt to backtrack from accusing me of being misinformed? If so, it fails. I told you democrats have pulled away from the “rare” wording and I also said they have pushed to do away with Hyde, and provided the receipts.

You posted those in reply to one person. And I’m here to say that if I have to pay for your husband’s ED meds, you should have to pay for a woman’s abortion. Them’s the breaks.

And as to rare: I think it was a thing Bill Clinton said thirty years ago. I think the GOP’s tack of making women’s health care illegal is far dumber than politicians moving away from the word “rare.”

Glad you agree that Democrats don’t believe in rare and want others to pay.

I’m fine with the current laws. Good luck changing them! You don’t have the votes unfortunately. And you’re about to lose the presidency too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, DCUM can’t see the point you are making because you said you were a Christian and then they all went blind with rage.

I think you’re right about that. Apparently’ they think freedom of religion applies to everyone except Christians.

Freedom of religion also means that I am free from the influence of YOUR religion as well. Jewish law states that life does not begin at conception, it begins at birth. Why should Christianity overrule Judaism?

Again, Christians can have freedom of religion- they don't have to get abortions. Your religion does NOT get to dictate what others do.

Yep, and that’s exact why the fourth sentence of my original post says that I am not asking anyone to agree with me. That is why I have repeatedly said that I think abortion should be legal for all because we all have such varying views.

Nope. Each state can decide for themselves if they want to have abortion restrictions and at one point. It’s not for some New Yorker to decide what the voters of Alabama want to do about abortion. Don’t like it? Move.

Nope. What I choose to do with my body and uterus is a fundamental right. You can't "states rights" away fundamental rights. See slavery.

You say that, but the law disagrees with you. Sorry!

The law changes. Sorry! Women will get their rights back

The law can absolutely change! There are mechanisms for this. At the federal level, you can push for a constitutional amendment. Good luck getting the states you need for that. And then there’s the state level. By all means, convince the people in deep red states that they should have elective abortions through the third trimester.

The good news is that there aren’t “elective” third trimester (that’s 27 weeks for those ignorant about pregnancy) abortions. So no one needs to go around convincing anyone of that.

But don’t you worry. At some point after some republicans’ daughters or wives have died because of abortion bans then the pendulum will swing back. One can only hope n

Elective abortion in the third trimester are rare but they do happen. Published medical studies on the reasons show it can be due to delays in seeking abortion care, finances, issues with the man in question but yes they do happen.

Third trimester elective abortions? Like hell those happen.

The medical literature is out there. Here is one example.

Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2022 Jun; 54(2): 38–45. Published online 2022 Apr 10. doi: 10.1363/psrh.12190

“Veronica, a 21‐year‐old Latina woman in the South, also did not realize she was pregnant until she was in the third trimester of pregnancy. Veronica was dating someone new and wanted to get tested for sexually transmitted infections before commencing a sexual relationship with this man. The clinic also ran a pregnancy test, which was positive. Veronica was shocked. She explained that she had no recognizable pregnancy symptoms and had been having a regular period: “It seemed to me like regular periods because it lasted the same amount of time that they would usually last […] and I never got morning sickness. I wasn't lethargic.” Veronica was immediately clear that she did not want to continue the pregnancy and took the first available abortion appointment at the clinic. When Veronica presented for her abortion appointment, the ultrasound worker determined that she was 25 weeks pregnant. Veronica needed an abortion in the third trimester because the fact that she was pregnant was new information to her when she was already 25 weeks pregnant.“

Now put the link to the website where you found that, forced birther.

Can you read? It’s in my post.

No, the link to the website where you found it. I should let you know that I already know where you got it, I just want you to out yourself.

It’s not my job to do the clicking for you. The literature citation was provided.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, DCUM can’t see the point you are making because you said you were a Christian and then they all went blind with rage.

I think you’re right about that. Apparently’ they think freedom of religion applies to everyone except Christians.

Freedom of religion also means that I am free from the influence of YOUR religion as well. Jewish law states that life does not begin at conception, it begins at birth. Why should Christianity overrule Judaism?

Again, Christians can have freedom of religion- they don't have to get abortions. Your religion does NOT get to dictate what others do.

Yep, and that’s exact why the fourth sentence of my original post says that I am not asking anyone to agree with me. That is why I have repeatedly said that I think abortion should be legal for all because we all have such varying views.

Nope. Each state can decide for themselves if they want to have abortion restrictions and at one point. It’s not for some New Yorker to decide what the voters of Alabama want to do about abortion. Don’t like it? Move.

Nope. What I choose to do with my body and uterus is a fundamental right. You can't "states rights" away fundamental rights. See slavery.

You say that, but the law disagrees with you. Sorry!

The law changes. Sorry! Women will get their rights back

The law can absolutely change! There are mechanisms for this. At the federal level, you can push for a constitutional amendment. Good luck getting the states you need for that. And then there’s the state level. By all means, convince the people in deep red states that they should have elective abortions through the third trimester.

The good news is that there aren’t “elective” third trimester (that’s 27 weeks for those ignorant about pregnancy) abortions. So no one needs to go around convincing anyone of that.

But don’t you worry. At some point after some republicans’ daughters or wives have died because of abortion bans then the pendulum will swing back. One can only hope n

Elective abortion in the third trimester are rare but they do happen. Published medical studies on the reasons show it can be due to delays in seeking abortion care, finances, issues with the man in question but yes they do happen.

Third trimester elective abortions? Like hell those happen.

The medical literature is out there. Here is one example.

Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2022 Jun; 54(2): 38–45. Published online 2022 Apr 10. doi: 10.1363/psrh.12190

“Veronica, a 21‐year‐old Latina woman in the South, also did not realize she was pregnant until she was in the third trimester of pregnancy. Veronica was dating someone new and wanted to get tested for sexually transmitted infections before commencing a sexual relationship with this man. The clinic also ran a pregnancy test, which was positive. Veronica was shocked. She explained that she had no recognizable pregnancy symptoms and had been having a regular period: “It seemed to me like regular periods because it lasted the same amount of time that they would usually last […] and I never got morning sickness. I wasn't lethargic.” Veronica was immediately clear that she did not want to continue the pregnancy and took the first available abortion appointment at the clinic. When Veronica presented for her abortion appointment, the ultrasound worker determined that she was 25 weeks pregnant. Veronica needed an abortion in the third trimester because the fact that she was pregnant was new information to her when she was already 25 weeks pregnant.“

Now put the link to the website where you found that, forced birther.

Can you read? It’s in my post.

No, the link to the website where you found it. I should let you know that I already know where you got it, I just want you to out yourself.

Out yourself? It’s medical literature. What a bizarre comment.

[Anonymous]

At no point in pregnancy is a politician more qualified to make decisions about your health than you and your health care providers. We all know people who have or will have miscarriages, ectopic pregnancies, preeclampsia, sepsis, or other unpredictable situations in pregnancy where abortion care is needed. We don't need politicians weighing in with arbitrary timelines. Abortion care is health care. Period.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, DCUM can’t see the point you are making because you said you were a Christian and then they all went blind with rage.

I think you’re right about that. Apparently’ they think freedom of religion applies to everyone except Christians.

Freedom of religion also means that I am free from the influence of YOUR religion as well. Jewish law states that life does not begin at conception, it begins at birth. Why should Christianity overrule Judaism?

Again, Christians can have freedom of religion- they don't have to get abortions. Your religion does NOT get to dictate what others do.

Yep, and that’s exact why the fourth sentence of my original post says that I am not asking anyone to agree with me. That is why I have repeatedly said that I think abortion should be legal for all because we all have such varying views.

Nope. Each state can decide for themselves if they want to have abortion restrictions and at one point. It’s not for some New Yorker to decide what the voters of Alabama want to do about abortion. Don’t like it? Move.

Nope. What I choose to do with my body and uterus is a fundamental right. You can't "states rights" away fundamental rights. See slavery.

You say that, but the law disagrees with you. Sorry!

The law changes. Sorry! Women will get their rights back

The law can absolutely change! There are mechanisms for this. At the federal level, you can push for a constitutional amendment. Good luck getting the states you need for that. And then there’s the state level. By all means, convince the people in deep red states that they should have elective abortions through the third trimester.

The good news is that there aren’t “elective” third trimester (that’s 27 weeks for those ignorant about pregnancy) abortions. So no one needs to go around convincing anyone of that.

But don’t you worry. At some point after some republicans’ daughters or wives have died because of abortion bans then the pendulum will swing back. One can only hope n

Elective abortion in the third trimester are rare but they do happen. Published medical studies on the reasons show it can be due to delays in seeking abortion care, finances, issues with the man in question but yes they do happen.

Third trimester elective abortions? Like hell those happen.

The medical literature is out there. Here is one example.

Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2022 Jun; 54(2): 38–45. Published online 2022 Apr 10. doi: 10.1363/psrh.12190

“Veronica, a 21‐year‐old Latina woman in the South, also did not realize she was pregnant until she was in the third trimester of pregnancy. Veronica was dating someone new and wanted to get tested for sexually transmitted infections before commencing a sexual relationship with this man. The clinic also ran a pregnancy test, which was positive. Veronica was shocked. She explained that she had no recognizable pregnancy symptoms and had been having a regular period: “It seemed to me like regular periods because it lasted the same amount of time that they would usually last […] and I never got morning sickness. I wasn't lethargic.” Veronica was immediately clear that she did not want to continue the pregnancy and took the first available abortion appointment at the clinic. When Veronica presented for her abortion appointment, the ultrasound worker determined that she was 25 weeks pregnant. Veronica needed an abortion in the third trimester because the fact that she was pregnant was new information to her when she was already 25 weeks pregnant.“

Now put the link to the website where you found that, forced birther.

Can you read? It’s in my post.

No, the link to the website where you found it. I should let you know that I already know where you got it, I just want you to out yourself.

It’s not my job to do the clicking for you. The literature citation was provided.

What literature is “Perspect Sex Reprod Health”? It’s nothing at all, at least not that way, and I sense you have no idea how to find it had the National Right to Life org not spoon fed it to you. Had you actually read the document in Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health you might realize that the author found all of 28 women who had abortions starting at 24 weeks (which is the second trimester and not third) and the author found “two pathways to needing a third-trimester abortion: new information, wherein the respondent learned new information about the pregnancy—such as of an observed serious fetal health issue or that she was pregnant—that made the pregnancy not (or no longer) one she wanted to continue; and barriers to abortion, wherein the respondent was in the third trimester by the time she was able to surmount the obstacles to abortion she faced, including cost, finding a provider, and stigmatization. These two pathways were not wholly distinct and sometimes overlapped.” Furthermore, six of the women had had their abortion more than a year prior.

I could go into more, but you’re a victim of forced birther propaganda.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Murder is a crime. Let the viable fetus live without its biological mother.

Why terminate the little when its mother is no longer needed?

[Anonymous]

The D’s wouldn’t gain any voters by changing their messaging on abortion. At least not at the moment. Why bother?

Same for the R’s. I am a very pro choice R, but there are not many like me. Abortion will be on the ballot in my state in Nov and will be voting for abortion rights yet also straight R.

I’m tired of abortion being a political issue at all. Most people are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a Liberal Christian Woman. There are many of us out there, and we are not even rare. We just aren’t being heard or considered on the topic of abortion, so every now and then I feel the need to point out the fact that we exist. I am not asking anyone to agree with my beliefs. I am just asking that you consider the fact that the messaging on both sides does not reflect the beliefs of so many of us. It is (unbelievably!) a close election, and here’s a demographic that is untapped.

The right is telling us that abortion is always murder. Period. Some say there are exceptions, but their policies do not reflect that. Democrats say that abortion=women’s rights, women’s health. Period. Many of us are somewhere in the middle.

I honestly wish the democrats would stop talking about abortion. Anyone who is open to understanding how disastrous the GOP is for women’s rights, health, and safety has already turned. the women who are left in the GOP will never see any gray area when it comes to abortion. They see it as the baby’s right to life in all circumstances. This is a deeply rooted, religious belief, and no policy or politician will change it. As a Christian Democrat, I don’t entirely disagree with them, but only when it comes to abortion based solely on lifestyle choice. I wish we could find a way to separate abortion as a lifestyle choice from the rest of it (health of mom and baby, rape and incest, family planning, procedures like D&Cs). But we lump it all together. D’s messaging really stinks when it comes to women’s rights. They let the GOP ramble on about 3rd trimester and post-birth abortions without even attempting to shut that down. I am in the legal, safe, and rare camp. Many Christians are. The message needs to be that the decision is made by women with input from their chosen support group, which could include partner, family, doctor, clergy. Yes, women need to be told by democrats that they support them leaning on clergy instead of politicians.

In all other aspects, I agree with Democrats - BC, women’s rights, abortion due to rape, incest, or medical conditions.

So many of us are perplexed by the following Trump has among Christians. Biden has been a devout Catholic his entire life. Trump isn’t even a real Christian and in no way lives in the spirit of Jesus, to put it mildly. But many Christians see it this way - Abortion is simply worse than anything he has done. Because they believe abortion=murder, and it doesn’t get any worse than murder. It is a very black and white issue for them. But a lot of us Christians do not fall in line with this. We just need messaging that considers those of us in the middle when it comes to abortion.

I dont care about your religious beliefs. Simple. They are not laws to be enforced on those who do not believe what you believe.

+1000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, DCUM can’t see the point you are making because you said you were a Christian and then they all went blind with rage.

I think you’re right about that. Apparently’ they think freedom of religion applies to everyone except Christians.

Freedom of religion also means that I am free from the influence of YOUR religion as well. Jewish law states that life does not begin at conception, it begins at birth. Why should Christianity overrule Judaism?

Again, Christians can have freedom of religion- they don't have to get abortions. Your religion does NOT get to dictate what others do.

Yep, and that’s exact why the fourth sentence of my original post says that I am not asking anyone to agree with me. That is why I have repeatedly said that I think abortion should be legal for all because we all have such varying views.

Nope. Each state can decide for themselves if they want to have abortion restrictions and at one point. It’s not for some New Yorker to decide what the voters of Alabama want to do about abortion. Don’t like it? Move.

Nope. What I choose to do with my body and uterus is a fundamental right. You can't "states rights" away fundamental rights. See slavery.

You say that, but the law disagrees with you. Sorry!

The law changes. Sorry! Women will get their rights back

The law can absolutely change! There are mechanisms for this. At the federal level, you can push for a constitutional amendment. Good luck getting the states you need for that. And then there’s the state level. By all means, convince the people in deep red states that they should have elective abortions through the third trimester.

The good news is that there aren’t “elective” third trimester (that’s 27 weeks for those ignorant about pregnancy) abortions. So no one needs to go around convincing anyone of that.

But don’t you worry. At some point after some republicans’ daughters or wives have died because of abortion bans then the pendulum will swing back. One can only hope n

Elective abortion in the third trimester are rare but they do happen. Published medical studies on the reasons show it can be due to delays in seeking abortion care, finances, issues with the man in question but yes they do happen.

Third trimester elective abortions? Like hell those happen.

The medical literature is out there. Here is one example.

Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2022 Jun; 54(2): 38–45. Published online 2022 Apr 10. doi: 10.1363/psrh.12190

“Veronica, a 21‐year‐old Latina woman in the South, also did not realize she was pregnant until she was in the third trimester of pregnancy. Veronica was dating someone new and wanted to get tested for sexually transmitted infections before commencing a sexual relationship with this man. The clinic also ran a pregnancy test, which was positive. Veronica was shocked. She explained that she had no recognizable pregnancy symptoms and had been having a regular period: “It seemed to me like regular periods because it lasted the same amount of time that they would usually last […] and I never got morning sickness. I wasn't lethargic.” Veronica was immediately clear that she did not want to continue the pregnancy and took the first available abortion appointment at the clinic. When Veronica presented for her abortion appointment, the ultrasound worker determined that she was 25 weeks pregnant. Veronica needed an abortion in the third trimester because the fact that she was pregnant was new information to her when she was already 25 weeks pregnant.“

Now put the link to the website where you found that, forced birther.

Can you read? It’s in my post.

No, the link to the website where you found it. I should let you know that I already know where you got it, I just want you to out yourself.

It’s not my job to do the clicking for you. The literature citation was provided.

What literature is “Perspect Sex Reprod Health”? It’s nothing at all, at least not that way, and I sense you have no idea how to find it had the National Right to Life org not spoon fed it to you. Had you actually read the document in Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health you might realize that the author found all of 28 women who had abortions starting at 24 weeks (which is the second trimester and not third) and the author found “two pathways to needing a third-trimester abortion: new information, wherein the respondent learned new information about the pregnancy—such as of an observed serious fetal health issue or that she was pregnant—that made the pregnancy not (or no longer) one she wanted to continue; and barriers to abortion, wherein the respondent was in the third trimester by the time she was able to surmount the obstacles to abortion she faced, including cost, finding a provider, and stigmatization. These two pathways were not wholly distinct and sometimes overlapped.” Furthermore, six of the women had had their abortion more than a year prior.

I could go into more, but you’re a victim of forced birther propaganda.

I’m sorry you aren’t familiar with medical literature but the citation was cited and no it wasn’t “spoon fed” to me by some right to life org. I’m glad you took the time to read the article (there are others) but disappointed at your (weak) attempt to slander me simply for educating you with receipts. It’s literally a cut and paste from the article so not sure what you think you are proving with more citations from it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The D’s wouldn’t gain any voters by changing their messaging on abortion. At least not at the moment. Why bother?

Same for the R’s. I am a very pro choice R, but there are not many like me. Abortion will be on the ballot in my state in Nov and will be voting for abortion rights yet also straight R.

Interesting choice. I imagine there will be a lot of liberals disappointed in that decision because they think abortion is women’s only voting issue and not the economy, immigration, foreign policy etc.