Official Abortion Thread

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How do we think this new anti-choice movement will affect 2020? Seems like a lot of women born after 1973 are coming to realize the rights they always thought they had are at risk.

Will you be more likely to vote Democratic knowing that the alternative is Trump replacing even more pro-choice justices?

Trump would likely need to replace one more judge since Justice Roberts is a small-c conservative.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do we think this new anti-choice movement will affect 2020? Seems like a lot of women born after 1973 are coming to realize the rights they always thought they had are at risk.

Will you be more likely to vote Democratic knowing that the alternative is Trump replacing even more pro-choice justices?

Trump would likely need to replace one more judge since Justice Roberts is a small-c conservative.

Does any anti-choice person or Trump supporter actually think he cares about life or babies? Or hasn't pressured/encouraged/supported his many lady friends to ever have an abortion? I don't understand how anyone thinks Trump is remotely anti-abortion as an individual person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do we think this new anti-choice movement will affect 2020? Seems like a lot of women born after 1973 are coming to realize the rights they always thought they had are at risk.

Will you be more likely to vote Democratic knowing that the alternative is Trump replacing even more pro-choice justices?

Trump would likely need to replace one more judge since Justice Roberts is a small-c conservative.

Does any anti-choice person or Trump supporter actually think he cares about life or babies? Or hasn't pressured/encouraged/supported his many lady friends to ever have an abortion? I don't understand how anyone thinks Trump is remotely anti-abortion as an individual person.

Trump told Howard Stern that he wanted Marla Maples to abort Tiffany.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do we think this new anti-choice movement will affect 2020? Seems like a lot of women born after 1973 are coming to realize the rights they always thought they had are at risk.

Will you be more likely to vote Democratic knowing that the alternative is Trump replacing even more pro-choice justices?

Trump would likely need to replace one more judge since Justice Roberts is a small-c conservative.

Does any anti-choice person or Trump supporter actually think he cares about life or babies? Or hasn't pressured/encouraged/supported his many lady friends to ever have an abortion? I don't understand how anyone thinks Trump is remotely anti-abortion as an individual person.

I don't think most of the far-right a--holes pushing these laws care about babies either.

They don't even care about their own professed Christianity except for those times they can use it as a cudgel against others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So are these states also revamping their sex education instruction to be more thorough and honest, and including free contraception for all, as well as comprehensive pre and post natal healthcare?

If not, they're obviously not interested in reducing abortions and unwanted pregnancies, but simply interested in punishing and shaming women.

ha ha ha ha ha. Of course they're not! This isn't about preventing unwanted pregnancies. It's just about forcing girls and women to have unwanted babies, so it's easier to control them.

[Anonymous]

“If fertilized eggs are morally equivalent to born people why aren’t we devoting tremendous research dollars to stopping miscarriages?” - bioethicist Katie Watson

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So are these states also revamping their sex education instruction to be more thorough and honest, and including free contraception for all, as well as comprehensive pre and post natal healthcare?

If not, they're obviously not interested in reducing abortions and unwanted pregnancies, but simply interested in punishing and shaming women.

ha ha ha ha ha. Of course they're not! This isn't about preventing unwanted pregnancies. It's just about forcing girls and women to have unwanted babies, so it's easier to control them.

No, you got it all wrong. We don't want you to procreate at all. Use birth control, have as much sex as you want, don't procreate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: “If fertilized eggs are morally equivalent to born people why aren’t we devoting tremendous research dollars to stopping miscarriages?” - bioethicist Katie Watson

It's not about the babies. It's about the unsanctioned sex. It's always been about the sex.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: “If fertilized eggs are morally equivalent to born people why aren’t we devoting tremendous research dollars to stopping miscarriages?” - bioethicist Katie Watson

It's not about the babies. It's about the unsanctioned sex. It's always been about the sex.

We don't care about your sex. Have it anyway you want, with whome ever you want. Just get sterilized.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

No, you got it all wrong. We don't want you to procreate at all. Use birth control, have as much sex as you want, don't procreate.

Bullshit. The right loses its mind every time you try to teach kids about birth control or make birth control more easily available. These are the same assholes who oppose the HPV vaccine even though it prevents cervical cancer because getting the vaccine encourages promiscuity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: “If fertilized eggs are morally equivalent to born people why aren’t we devoting tremendous research dollars to stopping miscarriages?” - bioethicist Katie Watson

It's not about the babies. It's about the unsanctioned sex. It's always been about the sex.

We don't care about your sex. Have it anyway you want, with whome ever you want. Just get sterilized.

Bet you don’t want to pay for that, though.

[Anonymous]

If a woman shows up at a hospital, losing her pregnancy - how will you determine who is having a miscarriage and who deliberately ended it? Pregnancy loss from taking an abortion pill is indistinguishable from miscarriage.

Still no input on this one. Hmmmm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

No, you got it all wrong. We don't want you to procreate at all. Use birth control, have as much sex as you want, don't procreate.

Bullshit. The right loses its mind every time you try to teach kids about birth control or make birth control more easily available. These are the same assholes who oppose the HPV vaccine even though it prevents cervical cancer because getting the vaccine encourages promiscuity.

We don't want it for our kids. You can do whatever you want. As long as you are sterilized.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: “If fertilized eggs are morally equivalent to born people why aren’t we devoting tremendous research dollars to stopping miscarriages?” - bioethicist Katie Watson

It's not about the babies. It's about the unsanctioned sex. It's always been about the sex.

We don't care about your sex. Have it anyway you want, with whome ever you want. Just get sterilized.

Bet you don’t want to pay for that, though.

I'd gladly pay for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

A woman has a right to control her body. Period. It doesn't matter the reason.

Too bad the body control only occurs after the pregnancy.

Abortion is the only way women can seemingly control their bodies.

I like how you let men off the hook so easily.

Unfortunately, I didn’t create humankind. I made no personal decision to build a woman’s body to carry unborn babies, and gift a man with a penis.

I also don’t force women to have sex with men who will not support them in case pregnancy occurs. Women choose who they have sex with. If they have sex with a man who won’t help support a possible pregnancy I can’t prevent that.

However, a man can be forced to take a paternity test and the government will even take money out of his check for child support should he prove to be the father and refuse financial responsibility.

What if the man who impregnated the woman does not work. Suppose, for the next several years the man decides to continue his studies (say complete high school, undergrad, and grad studies). How will the govt. force him to pay child support when he doesn't have any earnings?

Men who are ordered to pay child support are jailed if they do not comply.
Men aren’t going to be able to get their education from jail. Pay up dad.

My bff got pregnant and college and the dad was an exceptional athlete who went on to play in the NFL.

They hammered out an agreement where she supported their child until he finished college and got an NFL contract- which he did. He then repaid her and paid generous child support.

I don’t know why men should get a free pass to continue their education if pregnancy occurs.

This is not true in every state!