Abortion messaging needs to change

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any anyway, if killing a special needs child because the family can’t cope is not ok, is it ok to kill a baby? And if it’s not ok to kill a newborn baby, why is it ok to kill a fetus?

And if you are ok with killing a special needs fetus at 38 weeks, are you also ok with killing healthy fetuses at 38 weeks?

I am not ok with either.
I am also not ok that collectively speaking we do not give humanity to fetuses who are found to have defects or disabilities. I can certainly understand and have compassion for families that would choose to end such pregnancies, but that does not make it right. We need to do better to support those families raising special needs families. We might better do so if more of us could actually see them.

And if you tell me that I can’t possibly understand the plight of these families, I will tell you that I do, because I was in such a family. I saw my brother being born, and then I saw him diagnosed with a fatal heart defect days later. We were extremely poor, my parents couldn’t afford a hospital birth let alone the bills that came later after the diagnosis. We took my brother home to receive palliative care and he died a few days later. It was hard for all of us, and horrible for my mom. But not one of us can imagine that it would have been less horrible for her to abort.
We treasured our few days with my brother.

I gave birth to healthy children but have families around us where this was not so. I cannot imagine those children not being here, or being less valuable. Remember that any person could become disabled at any time in their life. That does not diminish their humanity.

If it’s not ok to kill a fetus why is it ok to kill a zygote? You tell us.

We have to draw a line somewhere.
The line I would draw is when the fetus is capable of living outside the mother.

I'll go one better. If it's not okay to.kill s fetus why does the GOP think it's fine to massacre children with AR 15's. Why don't you want to protect the fetus once it's born and is a living, breathing human?

I don’t know, because I am not part of the GOP nor do I think it’s fine to massacre children with AR-15s, nor do I think people should be able to have one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I’m an atheist and agree with you to a large extent. I am personally and politically supportive of full abortion rights—but I live in reality. Abortion is scary, sad and unfortunate for most people in the world. It should be rare. It shouldn’t be glorified.

The left’s insistence that none of this can be said out loud cost us Roe. And telling every woman who empathizes with a fetus that she is against women’s rights—when viability is getting earlier and earlier…it makes no sense. Anyone who has had a miscarriage or seen a fetal scan knows it’s natural to attach emotion to abortion. When the tiny percentage of women who really don’t feel anything regarding abortion (Chelsea handler etc) become the dominant voice, you lose credibility.

What are you even talking about? That is 100% not what caused the loss of Roe. If this were about abortion, rather than control, the White Christian Nationalists wouldn’t also be going after contraception. Oh wait, unless you also believe that the only sex that should occur is that between and husband and wife and only for the express purpose of procreation. In which case, we’re not going to agree and this is futile. But let me tell you, if they get a chance they’ll try to legislate this, too.

Clearly you aren’t a Democrat and think “the left” is Chelsea Handler. Wtf. Since when was she anyone of import? What’s the point of this conversation? People who believe life begins at conception and that any abortion is murder aren’t going to be swayed by anything, and especially if you think Chelsea Handler speaks for anyone or anything.

Also, keep out of our bedrooms and bodies. Don’t start none won’t be none.

I’m a divorced middle age feminist and I don’t think men are all that, but even I don’t see how some nutjobs are going to pull off banning contraception when at least 90% of men will not want it banned. Most men nowadays are not clamoring to have tons of children, and prefer for their female partners to have paying jobs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I’m an atheist and agree with you to a large extent. I am personally and politically supportive of full abortion rights—but I live in reality. Abortion is scary, sad and unfortunate for most people in the world. It should be rare. It shouldn’t be glorified.

The left’s insistence that none of this can be said out loud cost us Roe. And telling every woman who empathizes with a fetus that she is against women’s rights—when viability is getting earlier and earlier…it makes no sense. Anyone who has had a miscarriage or seen a fetal scan knows it’s natural to attach emotion to abortion. When the tiny percentage of women who really don’t feel anything regarding abortion (Chelsea handler etc) become the dominant voice, you lose credibility.

No one made Chelsea Handler the spokesperson for all women. She is free to share her experience. Which is very different than the experience of millions of other women. We all have our own individual circumstances.

DP but I think you might be missing the point. Of course we all have our own individual circumstances. Most women’s understanding about their bodies, their rights, their feelings about pregnancy is deep and nuanced. But the narrative that goes out into the world is dominated by the loudest voices, even if those voices are not nuanced and do not represent the more normative experiences. And that is ultimately hurting us.

That is happening with a lot of issues that people care about, not just this one.

Disagree. I think many women know exactly how critical it is to protect reproductive rights. They don't actually need any messaging at all from either side and they don't necessarily even listen to any loud voices.

That is why election after election since the fall of roe has gone more blue than the clueless loud voices predicted. The voters are showing up and quietly going about their voting business and trying to protect critical rights. It will happen once again in November.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I’m an atheist and agree with you to a large extent. I am personally and politically supportive of full abortion rights—but I live in reality. Abortion is scary, sad and unfortunate for most people in the world. It should be rare. It shouldn’t be glorified.

The left’s insistence that none of this can be said out loud cost us Roe. And telling every woman who empathizes with a fetus that she is against women’s rights—when viability is getting earlier and earlier…it makes no sense. Anyone who has had a miscarriage or seen a fetal scan knows it’s natural to attach emotion to abortion. When the tiny percentage of women who really don’t feel anything regarding abortion (Chelsea handler etc) become the dominant voice, you lose credibility.

What are you even talking about? That is 100% not what caused the loss of Roe. If this were about abortion, rather than control, the White Christian Nationalists wouldn’t also be going after contraception. Oh wait, unless you also believe that the only sex that should occur is that between and husband and wife and only for the express purpose of procreation. In which case, we’re not going to agree and this is futile. But let me tell you, if they get a chance they’ll try to legislate this, too.

Clearly you aren’t a Democrat and think “the left” is Chelsea Handler. Wtf. Since when was she anyone of import? What’s the point of this conversation? People who believe life begins at conception and that any abortion is murder aren’t going to be swayed by anything, and especially if you think Chelsea Handler speaks for anyone or anything.

Also, keep out of our bedrooms and bodies. Don’t start none won’t be none.

I’m a divorced middle age feminist and I don’t think men are all that, but even I don’t see how some nutjobs are going to pull off banning contraception when at least 90% of men will not want it banned. Most men nowadays are not clamoring to have tons of children, and prefer for their female partners to have paying jobs.

70% of America supports Roe and look what happened to that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I’m an atheist and agree with you to a large extent. I am personally and politically supportive of full abortion rights—but I live in reality. Abortion is scary, sad and unfortunate for most people in the world. It should be rare. It shouldn’t be glorified.

The left’s insistence that none of this can be said out loud cost us Roe. And telling every woman who empathizes with a fetus that she is against women’s rights—when viability is getting earlier and earlier…it makes no sense. Anyone who has had a miscarriage or seen a fetal scan knows it’s natural to attach emotion to abortion. When the tiny percentage of women who really don’t feel anything regarding abortion (Chelsea handler etc) become the dominant voice, you lose credibility.

What are you even talking about? That is 100% not what caused the loss of Roe. If this were about abortion, rather than control, the White Christian Nationalists wouldn’t also be going after contraception. Oh wait, unless you also believe that the only sex that should occur is that between and husband and wife and only for the express purpose of procreation. In which case, we’re not going to agree and this is futile. But let me tell you, if they get a chance they’ll try to legislate this, too.

Clearly you aren’t a Democrat and think “the left” is Chelsea Handler. Wtf. Since when was she anyone of import? What’s the point of this conversation? People who believe life begins at conception and that any abortion is murder aren’t going to be swayed by anything, and especially if you think Chelsea Handler speaks for anyone or anything.

Also, keep out of our bedrooms and bodies. Don’t start none won’t be none.

I’m a divorced middle age feminist and I don’t think men are all that, but even I don’t see how some nutjobs are going to pull off banning contraception when at least 90% of men will not want it banned. Most men nowadays are not clamoring to have tons of children, and prefer for their female partners to have paying jobs.

70% of America supports Roe and look what happened to that.

If Roe really had the support you think it does, people would be voting the guidelines into law nation wide. Your issue is simple, support for Roe’s terms aren’t as widespread nationwide as you think they are. They are in some areas of the US and not in others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I’m an atheist and agree with you to a large extent. I am personally and politically supportive of full abortion rights—but I live in reality. Abortion is scary, sad and unfortunate for most people in the world. It should be rare. It shouldn’t be glorified.

The left’s insistence that none of this can be said out loud cost us Roe. And telling every woman who empathizes with a fetus that she is against women’s rights—when viability is getting earlier and earlier…it makes no sense. Anyone who has had a miscarriage or seen a fetal scan knows it’s natural to attach emotion to abortion. When the tiny percentage of women who really don’t feel anything regarding abortion (Chelsea handler etc) become the dominant voice, you lose credibility.

What are you even talking about? That is 100% not what caused the loss of Roe. If this were about abortion, rather than control, the White Christian Nationalists wouldn’t also be going after contraception. Oh wait, unless you also believe that the only sex that should occur is that between and husband and wife and only for the express purpose of procreation. In which case, we’re not going to agree and this is futile. But let me tell you, if they get a chance they’ll try to legislate this, too.

Clearly you aren’t a Democrat and think “the left” is Chelsea Handler. Wtf. Since when was she anyone of import? What’s the point of this conversation? People who believe life begins at conception and that any abortion is murder aren’t going to be swayed by anything, and especially if you think Chelsea Handler speaks for anyone or anything.

Also, keep out of our bedrooms and bodies. Don’t start none won’t be none.

I’m a divorced middle age feminist and I don’t think men are all that, but even I don’t see how some nutjobs are going to pull off banning contraception when at least 90% of men will not want it banned. Most men nowadays are not clamoring to have tons of children, and prefer for their female partners to have paying jobs.

70% of America supports Roe and look what happened to that.

If Roe really had the support you think it does, people would be voting the guidelines into law nation wide. Your issue is simple, support for Roe’s terms aren’t as widespread nationwide as you think they are. They are in some areas of the US and not in others.

They are supported by a majority in both blue states and red states.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any anyway, if killing a special needs child because the family can’t cope is not ok, is it ok to kill a baby? And if it’s not ok to kill a newborn baby, why is it ok to kill a fetus?

And if you are ok with killing a special needs fetus at 38 weeks, are you also ok with killing healthy fetuses at 38 weeks?

I am not ok with either.
I am also not ok that collectively speaking we do not give humanity to fetuses who are found to have defects or disabilities. I can certainly understand and have compassion for families that would choose to end such pregnancies, but that does not make it right. We need to do better to support those families raising special needs families. We might better do so if more of us could actually see them.

And if you tell me that I can’t possibly understand the plight of these families, I will tell you that I do, because I was in such a family. I saw my brother being born, and then I saw him diagnosed with a fatal heart defect days later. We were extremely poor, my parents couldn’t afford a hospital birth let alone the bills that came later after the diagnosis. We took my brother home to receive palliative care and he died a few days later. It was hard for all of us, and horrible for my mom. But not one of us can imagine that it would have been less horrible for her to abort.
We treasured our few days with my brother.

I gave birth to healthy children but have families around us where this was not so. I cannot imagine those children not being here, or being less valuable. Remember that any person could become disabled at any time in their life. That does not diminish their humanity.

You’re a real crap person. 38 weeks? That doesn’t happen. And also, forcing other humans to risk their life, health, and fertility to carry a baby full term just to watch it die is unfathomable. That’s not your choice to make, and your condescension that they don’t value those much loved and wanted children just because they cannot, for their own reasons whatever they are, carry a dying child to term, is just so cruel. Your scenario is not today’s reality, where a woman discovers a terrible diagnosis of incompatibility with life much earlier than 38 weeks and the untreatable conditions (heart problems are luckily much more treatable now, even in utero) are just that. Risking possible financial ruin, stress on a marriage, health and fertility being risked with each additional day of pregnancy, for a baby that will not live and might suffer for the brief time they do live. It shouldn’t be up to anyone else, not me, not you, not the state, when that’s the situation.

I’m glad your mother found comfort in your sibling’s brief life. But your story is just that, a story and not relevant to another woman’s life and choices.

And you didn’t answer my question. 38 weeks? Ok or not, and why?

That's entirely not the point. The point simply is a woman's body - and the decision she makes regarding it - should be her own. Period and full stop. The government should have no part in the decision making process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I’m an atheist and agree with you to a large extent. I am personally and politically supportive of full abortion rights—but I live in reality. Abortion is scary, sad and unfortunate for most people in the world. It should be rare. It shouldn’t be glorified.

The left’s insistence that none of this can be said out loud cost us Roe. And telling every woman who empathizes with a fetus that she is against women’s rights—when viability is getting earlier and earlier…it makes no sense. Anyone who has had a miscarriage or seen a fetal scan knows it’s natural to attach emotion to abortion. When the tiny percentage of women who really don’t feel anything regarding abortion (Chelsea handler etc) become the dominant voice, you lose credibility.

What are you even talking about? That is 100% not what caused the loss of Roe. If this were about abortion, rather than control, the White Christian Nationalists wouldn’t also be going after contraception. Oh wait, unless you also believe that the only sex that should occur is that between and husband and wife and only for the express purpose of procreation. In which case, we’re not going to agree and this is futile. But let me tell you, if they get a chance they’ll try to legislate this, too.

Clearly you aren’t a Democrat and think “the left” is Chelsea Handler. Wtf. Since when was she anyone of import? What’s the point of this conversation? People who believe life begins at conception and that any abortion is murder aren’t going to be swayed by anything, and especially if you think Chelsea Handler speaks for anyone or anything.

Also, keep out of our bedrooms and bodies. Don’t start none won’t be none.

I’m a divorced middle age feminist and I don’t think men are all that, but even I don’t see how some nutjobs are going to pull off banning contraception when at least 90% of men will not want it banned. Most men nowadays are not clamoring to have tons of children, and prefer for their female partners to have paying jobs.

70% of America supports Roe and look what happened to that.

If Roe really had the support you think it does, people would be voting the guidelines into law nation wide. Your issue is simple, support for Roe’s terms aren’t as widespread nationwide as you think they are. They are in some areas of the US and not in others.

They are supported by a majority in both blue states and red states.

Again, if you had the votes you think you did, the laws in states like Mississippi would be different. That’s how representative democracy works.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any anyway, if killing a special needs child because the family can’t cope is not ok, is it ok to kill a baby? And if it’s not ok to kill a newborn baby, why is it ok to kill a fetus?

And if you are ok with killing a special needs fetus at 38 weeks, are you also ok with killing healthy fetuses at 38 weeks?

I am not ok with either.
I am also not ok that collectively speaking we do not give humanity to fetuses who are found to have defects or disabilities. I can certainly understand and have compassion for families that would choose to end such pregnancies, but that does not make it right. We need to do better to support those families raising special needs families. We might better do so if more of us could actually see them.

And if you tell me that I can’t possibly understand the plight of these families, I will tell you that I do, because I was in such a family. I saw my brother being born, and then I saw him diagnosed with a fatal heart defect days later. We were extremely poor, my parents couldn’t afford a hospital birth let alone the bills that came later after the diagnosis. We took my brother home to receive palliative care and he died a few days later. It was hard for all of us, and horrible for my mom. But not one of us can imagine that it would have been less horrible for her to abort.
We treasured our few days with my brother.

I gave birth to healthy children but have families around us where this was not so. I cannot imagine those children not being here, or being less valuable. Remember that any person could become disabled at any time in their life. That does not diminish their humanity.

You’re a real crap person. 38 weeks? That doesn’t happen. And also, forcing other humans to risk their life, health, and fertility to carry a baby full term just to watch it die is unfathomable. That’s not your choice to make, and your condescension that they don’t value those much loved and wanted children just because they cannot, for their own reasons whatever they are, carry a dying child to term, is just so cruel. Your scenario is not today’s reality, where a woman discovers a terrible diagnosis of incompatibility with life much earlier than 38 weeks and the untreatable conditions (heart problems are luckily much more treatable now, even in utero) are just that. Risking possible financial ruin, stress on a marriage, health and fertility being risked with each additional day of pregnancy, for a baby that will not live and might suffer for the brief time they do live. It shouldn’t be up to anyone else, not me, not you, not the state, when that’s the situation.

I’m glad your mother found comfort in your sibling’s brief life. But your story is just that, a story and not relevant to another woman’s life and choices.

And you didn’t answer my question. 38 weeks? Ok or not, and why?

That's entirely not the point. The point simply is a woman's body - and the decision she makes regarding it - should be her own. Period and full stop. The government should have no part in the decision making process.

No. Late term abortion restrictions are reasonable and the polls suggest most Americans agree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I’m an atheist and agree with you to a large extent. I am personally and politically supportive of full abortion rights—but I live in reality. Abortion is scary, sad and unfortunate for most people in the world. It should be rare. It shouldn’t be glorified.

The left’s insistence that none of this can be said out loud cost us Roe. And telling every woman who empathizes with a fetus that she is against women’s rights—when viability is getting earlier and earlier…it makes no sense. Anyone who has had a miscarriage or seen a fetal scan knows it’s natural to attach emotion to abortion. When the tiny percentage of women who really don’t feel anything regarding abortion (Chelsea handler etc) become the dominant voice, you lose credibility.

What are you even talking about? That is 100% not what caused the loss of Roe. If this were about abortion, rather than control, the White Christian Nationalists wouldn’t also be going after contraception. Oh wait, unless you also believe that the only sex that should occur is that between and husband and wife and only for the express purpose of procreation. In which case, we’re not going to agree and this is futile. But let me tell you, if they get a chance they’ll try to legislate this, too.

Clearly you aren’t a Democrat and think “the left” is Chelsea Handler. Wtf. Since when was she anyone of import? What’s the point of this conversation? People who believe life begins at conception and that any abortion is murder aren’t going to be swayed by anything, and especially if you think Chelsea Handler speaks for anyone or anything.

Also, keep out of our bedrooms and bodies. Don’t start none won’t be none.

I’m a divorced middle age feminist and I don’t think men are all that, but even I don’t see how some nutjobs are going to pull off banning contraception when at least 90% of men will not want it banned. Most men nowadays are not clamoring to have tons of children, and prefer for their female partners to have paying jobs.

70% of America supports Roe and look what happened to that.

If Roe really had the support you think it does, people would be voting the guidelines into law nation wide. Your issue is simple, support for Roe’s terms aren’t as widespread nationwide as you think they are. They are in some areas of the US and not in others.

They are supported by a majority in both blue states and red states.

Again, if you had the votes you think you did, the laws in states like Mississippi would be different. That’s how representative democracy works.

Ok sadly, maybe Mississippi for some reason. The other 49 support reproductive rights by a majority.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any anyway, if killing a special needs child because the family can’t cope is not ok, is it ok to kill a baby? And if it’s not ok to kill a newborn baby, why is it ok to kill a fetus?

And if you are ok with killing a special needs fetus at 38 weeks, are you also ok with killing healthy fetuses at 38 weeks?

I am not ok with either.
I am also not ok that collectively speaking we do not give humanity to fetuses who are found to have defects or disabilities. I can certainly understand and have compassion for families that would choose to end such pregnancies, but that does not make it right. We need to do better to support those families raising special needs families. We might better do so if more of us could actually see them.

And if you tell me that I can’t possibly understand the plight of these families, I will tell you that I do, because I was in such a family. I saw my brother being born, and then I saw him diagnosed with a fatal heart defect days later. We were extremely poor, my parents couldn’t afford a hospital birth let alone the bills that came later after the diagnosis. We took my brother home to receive palliative care and he died a few days later. It was hard for all of us, and horrible for my mom. But not one of us can imagine that it would have been less horrible for her to abort.
We treasured our few days with my brother.

I gave birth to healthy children but have families around us where this was not so. I cannot imagine those children not being here, or being less valuable. Remember that any person could become disabled at any time in their life. That does not diminish their humanity.

You’re a real crap person. 38 weeks? That doesn’t happen. And also, forcing other humans to risk their life, health, and fertility to carry a baby full term just to watch it die is unfathomable. That’s not your choice to make, and your condescension that they don’t value those much loved and wanted children just because they cannot, for their own reasons whatever they are, carry a dying child to term, is just so cruel. Your scenario is not today’s reality, where a woman discovers a terrible diagnosis of incompatibility with life much earlier than 38 weeks and the untreatable conditions (heart problems are luckily much more treatable now, even in utero) are just that. Risking possible financial ruin, stress on a marriage, health and fertility being risked with each additional day of pregnancy, for a baby that will not live and might suffer for the brief time they do live. It shouldn’t be up to anyone else, not me, not you, not the state, when that’s the situation.

I’m glad your mother found comfort in your sibling’s brief life. But your story is just that, a story and not relevant to another woman’s life and choices.

And you didn’t answer my question. 38 weeks? Ok or not, and why?

That's entirely not the point. The point simply is a woman's body - and the decision she makes regarding it - should be her own. Period and full stop. The government should have no part in the decision making process.

No. Late term abortion restrictions are reasonable and the polls suggest most Americans agree.

Yes most Americans were fine with Roe. Let’s go back to that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

What distinction are you drawing between "family planning" and "lifestyle choice"? Because "I just don't want a baby right now, it's not in my family life plan at this point in time" seems an awful lot like "lifestyle choice" to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Any anyway, if killing a special needs child because the family can’t cope is not ok, is it ok to kill a baby? And if it’s not ok to kill a newborn baby, why is it ok to kill a fetus?

And if you are ok with killing a special needs fetus at 38 weeks, are you also ok with killing healthy fetuses at 38 weeks?

I am not ok with either.
I am also not ok that collectively speaking we do not give humanity to fetuses who are found to have defects or disabilities. I can certainly understand and have compassion for families that would choose to end such pregnancies, but that does not make it right. We need to do better to support those families raising special needs families. We might better do so if more of us could actually see them.

And if you tell me that I can’t possibly understand the plight of these families, I will tell you that I do, because I was in such a family. I saw my brother being born, and then I saw him diagnosed with a fatal heart defect days later. We were extremely poor, my parents couldn’t afford a hospital birth let alone the bills that came later after the diagnosis. We took my brother home to receive palliative care and he died a few days later. It was hard for all of us, and horrible for my mom. But not one of us can imagine that it would have been less horrible for her to abort.
We treasured our few days with my brother.

I gave birth to healthy children but have families around us where this was not so. I cannot imagine those children not being here, or being less valuable. Remember that any person could become disabled at any time in their life. That does not diminish their humanity.

That is not your choice to make....or to force the absence of choice. Not everyone processes the same way and some people would not want to provide palliative care and watch their child die. Again, remove yourself from everyone else's decisions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any anyway, if killing a special needs child because the family can’t cope is not ok, is it ok to kill a baby? And if it’s not ok to kill a newborn baby, why is it ok to kill a fetus?

And if you are ok with killing a special needs fetus at 38 weeks, are you also ok with killing healthy fetuses at 38 weeks?

I am not ok with either.
I am also not ok that collectively speaking we do not give humanity to fetuses who are found to have defects or disabilities. I can certainly understand and have compassion for families that would choose to end such pregnancies, but that does not make it right. We need to do better to support those families raising special needs families. We might better do so if more of us could actually see them.

And if you tell me that I can’t possibly understand the plight of these families, I will tell you that I do, because I was in such a family. I saw my brother being born, and then I saw him diagnosed with a fatal heart defect days later. We were extremely poor, my parents couldn’t afford a hospital birth let alone the bills that came later after the diagnosis. We took my brother home to receive palliative care and he died a few days later. It was hard for all of us, and horrible for my mom. But not one of us can imagine that it would have been less horrible for her to abort.
We treasured our few days with my brother.

I gave birth to healthy children but have families around us where this was not so. I cannot imagine those children not being here, or being less valuable. Remember that any person could become disabled at any time in their life. That does not diminish their humanity.

You’re a real crap person. 38 weeks? That doesn’t happen. And also, forcing other humans to risk their life, health, and fertility to carry a baby full term just to watch it die is unfathomable. That’s not your choice to make, and your condescension that they don’t value those much loved and wanted children just because they cannot, for their own reasons whatever they are, carry a dying child to term, is just so cruel. Your scenario is not today’s reality, where a woman discovers a terrible diagnosis of incompatibility with life much earlier than 38 weeks and the untreatable conditions (heart problems are luckily much more treatable now, even in utero) are just that. Risking possible financial ruin, stress on a marriage, health and fertility being risked with each additional day of pregnancy, for a baby that will not live and might suffer for the brief time they do live. It shouldn’t be up to anyone else, not me, not you, not the state, when that’s the situation.

I’m glad your mother found comfort in your sibling’s brief life. But your story is just that, a story and not relevant to another woman’s life and choices.

And you didn’t answer my question. 38 weeks? Ok or not, and why?

That's entirely not the point. The point simply is a woman's body - and the decision she makes regarding it - should be her own. Period and full stop. The government should have no part in the decision making process.

No. Late term abortion restrictions are reasonable and the polls suggest most Americans agree.

Yes most Americans were fine with Roe. Let’s go back to that.

+1000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I’m an atheist and agree with you to a large extent. I am personally and politically supportive of full abortion rights—but I live in reality. Abortion is scary, sad and unfortunate for most people in the world. It should be rare. It shouldn’t be glorified.

The left’s insistence that none of this can be said out loud cost us Roe. And telling every woman who empathizes with a fetus that she is against women’s rights—when viability is getting earlier and earlier…it makes no sense. Anyone who has had a miscarriage or seen a fetal scan knows it’s natural to attach emotion to abortion. When the tiny percentage of women who really don’t feel anything regarding abortion (Chelsea handler etc) become the dominant voice, you lose credibility.

What are you even talking about? That is 100% not what caused the loss of Roe. If this were about abortion, rather than control, the White Christian Nationalists wouldn’t also be going after contraception. Oh wait, unless you also believe that the only sex that should occur is that between and husband and wife and only for the express purpose of procreation. In which case, we’re not going to agree and this is futile. But let me tell you, if they get a chance they’ll try to legislate this, too.

Clearly you aren’t a Democrat and think “the left” is Chelsea Handler. Wtf. Since when was she anyone of import? What’s the point of this conversation? People who believe life begins at conception and that any abortion is murder aren’t going to be swayed by anything, and especially if you think Chelsea Handler speaks for anyone or anything.

Also, keep out of our bedrooms and bodies. Don’t start none won’t be none.

I’m a divorced middle age feminist and I don’t think men are all that, but even I don’t see how some nutjobs are going to pull off banning contraception when at least 90% of men will not want it banned. Most men nowadays are not clamoring to have tons of children, and prefer for their female partners to have paying jobs.

70% of America supports Roe and look what happened to that.

If Roe really had the support you think it does, people would be voting the guidelines into law nation wide. Your issue is simple, support for Roe’s terms aren’t as widespread nationwide as you think they are. They are in some areas of the US and not in others.

How? Legislative Districts have been gerrymandered so that the majority doesn’t have representation, especially on this one issue. But keep it up, it’s only going to help Ds at the polls. And then we will, and then we’ll take back the activist corrupt Supreme Court.