Roe v Wade struck down

[Anonymous]

Pro-Forced Birth is the most accurate

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LOL "pro baby". can't wait to see this.

Well at least it’s not as ridiculous as “pro life.” The party that believes in guns (i.e killing machines) can’t also be “pro life.”

and Capital Punishment

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Pro-Forced Birth is the most accurate

These con artists do not want accurate. They want to manipulate people to try to get votes. But yes...pro-forced birth is what this policy is properly called.

[Anonymous]

Understand, when the right uses the "dems support abortion to the 9th month" BS, they rae baiscally saying that they don't want healthcare to supercede when the life of the mother is at stake or the baby is no longer viable

Do not let them get away with this, the number if elective abortions in the 3rd trimester is zero.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Understand, when the right uses the "dems support abortion to the 9th month" BS, they rae baiscally saying that they don't want healthcare to supercede when the life of the mother is at stake or the baby is no longer viable

Do not let them get away with this, the number if elective abortions in the 3rd trimester is zero.

Because women aren’t people in the GOP. It’s that simple.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Understand, when the right uses the "dems support abortion to the 9th month" BS, they rae baiscally saying that they don't want healthcare to supercede when the life of the mother is at stake or the baby is no longer viable

Do not let them get away with this, the number if elective abortions in the 3rd trimester is zero.

Get away with treating the voters like idiots? No worries. If you think you are smarter than the voters Chris Christi, and we are going to be like...Gee whiz, there are so many 9th month abortions to deal with, we better vote for Chris Christie" think again.

We want a candidate that we say he or she will fight back to regain women's reproductive rights we had under Roe. Say that or get lost.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Understand, when the right uses the "dems support abortion to the 9th month" BS, they rae baiscally saying that they don't want healthcare to supercede when the life of the mother is at stake or the baby is no longer viable

Do not let them get away with this, the number if elective abortions in the 3rd trimester is zero.

They're also saying they think parents of a severely premature baby or baby born with severe defects incompatible with life shouldn't be able to choose palliative "comfort care" over horrifying, harsh attempts to keep the baby alive for as long as possible. That is the nightmare scenario the GOP thinks is "pro-life."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Understand, when the right uses the "dems support abortion to the 9th month" BS, they rae baiscally saying that they don't want healthcare to supercede when the life of the mother is at stake or the baby is no longer viable

Do not let them get away with this, the number if elective abortions in the 3rd trimester is zero.

They're also saying they think parents of a severely premature baby or baby born with severe defects incompatible with life shouldn't be able to choose palliative "comfort care" over horrifying, harsh attempts to keep the baby alive for as long as possible. That is the nightmare scenario the GOP thinks is "pro-life."

Who are we to understand the GOP conception of “God’s will”? If God didn’t want people to torture hopeless infants, he wouldn’t have sent them into the world in that state alive!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Understand, when the right uses the "dems support abortion to the 9th month" BS, they rae baiscally saying that they don't want healthcare to supercede when the life of the mother is at stake or the baby is no longer viable

Do not let them get away with this, the number if elective abortions in the 3rd trimester is zero.

They're also saying they think parents of a severely premature baby or baby born with severe defects incompatible with life shouldn't be able to choose palliative "comfort care" over horrifying, harsh attempts to keep the baby alive for as long as possible. That is the nightmare scenario the GOP thinks is "pro-life."

Oh god that’s right. There was a point in the last year or two when they likened palliative care for the kind of infant you mentioned to a post birth abortion and I nearly vomited. Yes, some parents do choose to try everything for their micropreemie and some parents who want to give their child with their intestines growing outside their body every chance, and that is their right. But to force a family into that is monstrous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Understand, when the right uses the "dems support abortion to the 9th month" BS, they rae baiscally saying that they don't want healthcare to supercede when the life of the mother is at stake or the baby is no longer viable

Do not let them get away with this, the number if elective abortions in the 3rd trimester is zero.

They're also saying they think parents of a severely premature baby or baby born with severe defects incompatible with life shouldn't be able to choose palliative "comfort care" over horrifying, harsh attempts to keep the baby alive for as long as possible. That is the nightmare scenario the GOP thinks is "pro-life."

Oh god that’s right. There was a point in the last year or two when they likened palliative care for the kind of infant you mentioned to a post birth abortion and I nearly vomited. Yes, some parents do choose to try everything for their micropreemie and some parents who want to give their child with their intestines growing outside their body every chance, and that is their right. But to force a family into that is monstrous.

Yes, this stemmed from a discussion with Ralph Northam that was aired on a news program (WTOP, maybe?) where he mentioned palliative care vs extreme measures being up to the family/mother and their doctor. From that came the whole right-wing "abortion up to and after birth" propaganda, all the way to one of Trump's State of the Union speeches.
Simply barbaric.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Understand, when the right uses the "dems support abortion to the 9th month" BS, they rae baiscally saying that they don't want healthcare to supercede when the life of the mother is at stake or the baby is no longer viable

Do not let them get away with this, the number if elective abortions in the 3rd trimester is zero.

They're also saying they think parents of a severely premature baby or baby born with severe defects incompatible with life shouldn't be able to choose palliative "comfort care" over horrifying, harsh attempts to keep the baby alive for as long as possible. That is the nightmare scenario the GOP thinks is "pro-life."

Oh god that’s right. There was a point in the last year or two when they likened palliative care for the kind of infant you mentioned to a post birth abortion and I nearly vomited. Yes, some parents do choose to try everything for their micropreemie and some parents who want to give their child with their intestines growing outside their body every chance, and that is their right. But to force a family into that is monstrous.

Yes, this stemmed from a discussion with Ralph Northam that was aired on a news program (WTOP, maybe?) where he mentioned palliative care vs extreme measures being up to the family/mother and their doctor. From that came the whole right-wing "abortion up to and after birth" propaganda, all the way to one of Trump's State of the Union speeches.
Simply barbaric.

+1 This nuanced discussion by a frigging pediatrician led to Trump saying that Democrats supported “abortion after birth” at the first debate with Hillary which 100 million people watched. Insanity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Understand, when the right uses the "dems support abortion to the 9th month" BS, they rae baiscally saying that they don't want healthcare to supercede when the life of the mother is at stake or the baby is no longer viable

Do not let them get away with this, the number if elective abortions in the 3rd trimester is zero.

They're also saying they think parents of a severely premature baby or baby born with severe defects incompatible with life shouldn't be able to choose palliative "comfort care" over horrifying, harsh attempts to keep the baby alive for as long as possible. That is the nightmare scenario the GOP thinks is "pro-life."

Oh god that’s right. There was a point in the last year or two when they likened palliative care for the kind of infant you mentioned to a post birth abortion and I nearly vomited. Yes, some parents do choose to try everything for their micropreemie and some parents who want to give their child with their intestines growing outside their body every chance, and that is their right. But to force a family into that is monstrous.

Yes, this stemmed from a discussion with Ralph Northam that was aired on a news program (WTOP, maybe?) where he mentioned palliative care vs extreme measures being up to the family/mother and their doctor. From that came the whole right-wing "abortion up to and after birth" propaganda, all the way to one of Trump's State of the Union speeches.
Simply barbaric.

+1 This nuanced discussion by a frigging pediatrician led to Trump saying that Democrats supported “abortion after birth” at the first debate with Hillary which 100 million people watched. Insanity.

Northam was a pediatric neurologist, if I remember correctly.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

It seems like the proper defendants are the physicians and hospitals denying the care

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It seems like the proper defendants are the physicians and hospitals denying the care

You sound like a forced birther desperate to shift blame from your crappy beliefs and votes to the people who have been forced to provide sub par medical care because of your crappy beliefs and votes.