Abortion messaging needs to change

[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.

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

You got lucky that abortion is on your ballot. Most states in the South will never see that option. Would you still vote straight R if abortion wasn't up for a vote?

[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.

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

Sorry but if you are voting straight R you are voting against abortion rights. No party has done more to set women back and destroy their fundamental rights than the trump and the GOP.

Of course abortion is a political issue. Thank the GOP for that. In fact trump was pro choice until he realized he could get no traction politically in the democratic party. He went GOP to better manipulate anti abortion voters and anti women voters and boy was he correct. Does he care one bit about abortion? No. He says what he says to get a vote. Period. What a low level jerk.

[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]

Very well written. A bit more cleanup and this world prob be a NYT opinion piece

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Very well written. A bit more cleanup and this world prob be a NYT opinion piece

Lol. The future of messaging is not the NYT opinion page.

With or without anymore messaging, all the moms and their allies out here understand what to do and who to bring along with them to the polls to vote for Dems.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Give up OP. Your fellow Democrats only see red in this user and cannot think logically or emphatically. You have people out there messaging how proud they are of their abortions. It is one thing for abortion to be legal. Quite another to be proud. The messaging is so far gone it is an echo chamber. They are not at all trying to find a middle ground/consensus.

Most of the people I know who are lukewarm on this issue think all the arguing is really silly. MOST women won't be in a position to get an abortion. Abortion affects very little people. The reason abortion is such a hot topic is simply because most people don't care because they aren't affected by it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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

You got lucky that abortion is on your ballot. Most states in the South will never see that option. Would you still vote straight R if abortion wasn't up for a vote?

Yes. Abortion is lower on my list of priorities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Ah, forced birthers, never change you guys. Never change, never learn anything.

DP. I assume this poster was responding to the abortion of a 25 week fetus. I hate to break it to you, but an abortion at 25 weeks is a pretty invasive procedure, compared with a vaginal delivery. Babies born at 25 weeks either vaginally or by cesarean often survive. The biggest difference is that in the abortion, the fetus dies.

Woman do own their own bodies, and should be able to end a pregnancy if they choose, either by abortion (before viability) or by induction of a premature but viable fetus. What is more dubious is if we have the right end the life of a viable fetus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Ah, forced birthers, never change you guys. Never change, never learn anything.

DP. I assume this poster was responding to the abortion of a 25 week fetus. I hate to break it to you, but an abortion at 25 weeks is a pretty invasive procedure, compared with a vaginal delivery. Babies born at 25 weeks either vaginally or by cesarean often survive. The biggest difference is that in the abortion, the fetus dies.

Woman do own their own bodies, and should be able to end a pregnancy if they choose, either by abortion (before viability) or by induction of a premature but viable fetus. What is more dubious is if we have the right end the life of a viable fetus.

Here's the problem with your scenario. Who decides whether the reason for aborting a "viable" fetus is valid? Which defects are valid? Down Syndrome isn't a fatal disease and the fetus is indeed "viable", but lots of families do not have the capacity to raise a special needs child and do not wish to do so. So who makes the call on which abortions are okay and which ones aren't? Will a doctor have to consult with a lawyer for CYA? What if the doctor feels that he wants to do the procedure but the hospital is worried that the reason isn't good enough?

Putting up all these hurdles for abortions are just making things complicated for doctors and women both. If a person wants an abortion after 25 weeks, it's probably not because she just suddenly changed her mind. There are some cases, yes, but the majority are not. Just let doctors be doctors.

[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:

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.

The way you spun it, you’d think women were out there in the thousands changing their minds, every day, weeks before birth. You didn’t uncover a single example of a woman who decided to get a truly “I decided I don’t want this pregnancy I’ve been carrying for eight months” elective abortion. Why? Because it doesn’t happen.

And it’s not a weak attempt at slander. You got that garbage fed straight to you from Life News. You might swallow that hook line and sinker, but thinking people do not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Ah, forced birthers, never change you guys. Never change, never learn anything.

DP. I assume this poster was responding to the abortion of a 25 week fetus. I hate to break it to you, but an abortion at 25 weeks is a pretty invasive procedure, compared with a vaginal delivery. Babies born at 25 weeks either vaginally or by cesarean often survive. The biggest difference is that in the abortion, the fetus dies.

Woman do own their own bodies, and should be able to end a pregnancy if they choose, either by abortion (before viability) or by induction of a premature but viable fetus. What is more dubious is if we have the right end the life of a viable fetus.

Who is doing this? A healthy viable fetus when the mother’s future health/fertility/life isn’t threatened? No, this is a not a thing.

[Anonymous]

I’ve had three pregnancies and three live births. Ain’t nobody carrying a baby for over 25 weeks, suffering morning sickness and getting stretch marks a d risking high blood pressure and diabetes and all your neighbor and friends see you pregnant and then just casually seeking an abortion just on a whim. You incel jack-holes who’ve never even gotten to 2nd base need to shut up. You know not of which you speak. Exit the room.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Give up OP. Your fellow Democrats only see red in this user and cannot think logically or emphatically. You have people out there messaging how proud they are of their abortions. It is one thing for abortion to be legal. Quite another to be proud. The messaging is so far gone it is an echo chamber. They are not at all trying to find a middle ground/consensus.

Most of the people I know who are lukewarm on this issue think all the arguing is really silly. MOST women won't be in a position to get an abortion. Abortion affects very little people. The reason abortion is such a hot topic is simply because most people don't care because they aren't affected by it.

Total bull crap. You know someone that has had an abortion. You know someone that has suffered a rape. You know someone that has had IVF. And all of it is none of your beeswax. But you know them and you probably even depend on some of them.

[Anonymous]

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

In your opinion. My god, the pretentiousness of some of you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Ah, forced birthers, never change you guys. Never change, never learn anything.

DP. I assume this poster was responding to the abortion of a 25 week fetus. I hate to break it to you, but an abortion at 25 weeks is a pretty invasive procedure, compared with a vaginal delivery. Babies born at 25 weeks either vaginally or by cesarean often survive. The biggest difference is that in the abortion, the fetus dies.

Woman do own their own bodies, and should be able to end a pregnancy if they choose, either by abortion (before viability) or by induction of a premature but viable fetus. What is more dubious is if we have the right end the life of a viable fetus.

Here's the problem with your scenario. Who decides whether the reason for aborting a "viable" fetus is valid? Which defects are valid? Down Syndrome isn't a fatal disease and the fetus is indeed "viable", but lots of families do not have the capacity to raise a special needs child and do not wish to do so. So who makes the call on which abortions are okay and which ones aren't? Will a doctor have to consult with a lawyer for CYA? What if the doctor feels that he wants to do the procedure but the hospital is worried that the reason isn't good enough?

Putting up all these hurdles for abortions are just making things complicated for doctors and women both. If a person wants an abortion after 25 weeks, it's probably not because she just suddenly changed her mind. There are some cases, yes, but the majority are not. Just let doctors be doctors.

In my scenario, it doesn’t matter that the reason is. What matters is that a fetus at 25 weeks is viable and capable of living outside the mother. There is a way to remove the fetus from the mother’s body without killing it. Win-win.

This scenario would be extremely uncommon, since most women who carried that long might just rather go through with the rest of the pregnancy, even if they found out they were pregnant at 25 weeks. But it would be a way out for a woman for whom that absolutely isn’t an option.