“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled," Justice Alito writes in an initial majority draft

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think this decision would force parents to allow invasive medical care for infants that are born with severe medical problems? I can see that happening. If you forced me to give birth to a child I knew had very little chance, could you force me to make that child suffer through surgeries and other interventions after birth?

This is all so messed up.

I doubt it. It's well-established that forced-birthers don't give a f** about babies after they are born.

No more a fact than if I claimed that abortionists like you don't care if babies live or die.

Actually completely different. An embryo is not a baby.

Fine. Abortionists like you can say you're pregnant with an embryo. Women i know say they're pregnant with a baby.

I am pro-choice and my BIL was pro-life. We both call our pregnancies “the baby”. One day, in SIL’s third trimester, BIL & SIL found out that the baby was developing without any brain. There was no hope that the baby would ever do more than live in a vegetative state for an undetermined amount of time - days, weeks, months, maybe a couple of years at best. The baby would require around the clock care-giving. BIL and SIL chose to have an abortion.

People who have abortions sometimes are aborting babies - they are often wanted pregnancies until something goes catastrophically wrong. BIL and SIL made the best possible choice for them and their future family, which includes 3 more babies that they had after their abortion. Babies that they never would have had but for abortion.

Abortion is pro-life, but it includes not only thinking about whether the baby lives or dies, but also what kind of quality of life the baby and family would have.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Could this ruling also set precedent that would prevent people from having their end-of-life choices made by family members if a state’s voters think people need to be on ventilators long term?

Almost for sure it would. Most likely, this will come up first with respect to keeping a comatose pregnant woman "alive". Actually, hasn't it already?

Oh Jesus. That’s just too much for my brain to handle right now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think this decision would force parents to allow invasive medical care for infants that are born with severe medical problems? I can see that happening. If you forced me to give birth to a child I knew had very little chance, could you force me to make that child suffer through surgeries and other interventions after birth?

This is all so messed up.

I doubt it. It's well-established that forced-birthers don't give a f** about babies after they are born.

No more a fact than if I claimed that abortionists like you don't care if babies live or die.

Actually completely different. An embryo is not a baby.

Fine. Abortionists like you can say you're pregnant with an embryo. Women i know say they're pregnant with a baby.

I am pro-choice and my BIL was pro-life. We both call our pregnancies “the baby”. One day, in SIL’s third trimester, BIL & SIL found out that the baby was developing without any brain. There was no hope that the baby would ever do more than live in a vegetative state for an undetermined amount of time - days, weeks, months, maybe a couple of years at best. The baby would require around the clock care-giving. BIL and SIL chose to have an abortion.

People who have abortions sometimes are aborting babies - they are often wanted pregnancies until something goes catastrophically wrong. BIL and SIL made the best possible choice for them and their future family, which includes 3 more babies that they had after their abortion. Babies that they never would have had but for abortion.

Abortion is pro-life, but it includes not only thinking about whether the baby lives or dies, but also what kind of quality of life the baby and family would have.

It's such a familiar story. SO MANY anti-abortionists actually turn out to believe in choice when they are faced with a terrible situation. Funny how that works.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think this decision would force parents to allow invasive medical care for infants that are born with severe medical problems? I can see that happening. If you forced me to give birth to a child I knew had very little chance, could you force me to make that child suffer through surgeries and other interventions after birth?

This is all so messed up.

I doubt it. It's well-established that forced-birthers don't give a f** about babies after they are born.

No more a fact than if I claimed that abortionists like you don't care if babies live or die.

Actually completely different. An embryo is not a baby.

Fine. Abortionists like you can say you're pregnant with an embryo. Women i know say they're pregnant with a baby.

I am pro-choice and my BIL was pro-life. We both call our pregnancies “the baby”. One day, in SIL’s third trimester, BIL & SIL found out that the baby was developing without any brain. There was no hope that the baby would ever do more than live in a vegetative state for an undetermined amount of time - days, weeks, months, maybe a couple of years at best. The baby would require around the clock care-giving. BIL and SIL chose to have an abortion.

People who have abortions sometimes are aborting babies - they are often wanted pregnancies until something goes catastrophically wrong. BIL and SIL made the best possible choice for them and their future family, which includes 3 more babies that they had after their abortion. Babies that they never would have had but for abortion.

Abortion is pro-life, but it includes not only thinking about whether the baby lives or dies, but also what kind of quality of life the baby and family would have.

PP here. I'm very much in agreement that many abortions are needed and appropriate. I'm not opposed and think a woman and her doctor and the father of the baby (if involved) should decide. I'm opposed to abortions on demand

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think this decision would force parents to allow invasive medical care for infants that are born with severe medical problems? I can see that happening. If you forced me to give birth to a child I knew had very little chance, could you force me to make that child suffer through surgeries and other interventions after birth?

This is all so messed up.

I doubt it. It's well-established that forced-birthers don't give a f** about babies after they are born.

Truth.

Generalizations are absurd.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think this decision would force parents to allow invasive medical care for infants that are born with severe medical problems? I can see that happening. If you forced me to give birth to a child I knew had very little chance, could you force me to make that child suffer through surgeries and other interventions after birth?

This is all so messed up.

I doubt it. It's well-established that forced-birthers don't give a f** about babies after they are born.

No more a fact than if I claimed that abortionists like you don't care if babies live or die.

Actually completely different. An embryo is not a baby.

Fine. Abortionists like you can say you're pregnant with an embryo. Women i know say they're pregnant with a baby.

I call my dog a baby. Does that make it a person? 🤔

Hardly. Love my dog, too!!

[Anonymous]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgjGwOByays

George called the spade a spade. Note that the states with strongest "pro-life" voices generally are the poorest, have the fewest social services, and are the least healthy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think this decision would force parents to allow invasive medical care for infants that are born with severe medical problems? I can see that happening. If you forced me to give birth to a child I knew had very little chance, could you force me to make that child suffer through surgeries and other interventions after birth?

This is all so messed up.

I doubt it. It's well-established that forced-birthers don't give a f** about babies after they are born.

No more a fact than if I claimed that abortionists like you don't care if babies live or die.

Actually completely different. An embryo is not a baby.

Fine. Abortionists like you can say you're pregnant with an embryo. Women i know say they're pregnant with a baby.

I am pro-choice and my BIL was pro-life. We both call our pregnancies “the baby”. One day, in SIL’s third trimester, BIL & SIL found out that the baby was developing without any brain. There was no hope that the baby would ever do more than live in a vegetative state for an undetermined amount of time - days, weeks, months, maybe a couple of years at best. The baby would require around the clock care-giving. BIL and SIL chose to have an abortion.

People who have abortions sometimes are aborting babies - they are often wanted pregnancies until something goes catastrophically wrong. BIL and SIL made the best possible choice for them and their future family, which includes 3 more babies that they had after their abortion. Babies that they never would have had but for abortion.

Abortion is pro-life, but it includes not only thinking about whether the baby lives or dies, but also what kind of quality of life the baby and family would have.

PP here. I'm very much in agreement that many abortions are needed and appropriate. I'm not opposed and think a woman and her doctor and the father of the baby (if involved) should decide. I'm opposed to abortions on demand

great, then you support Roe.

Alito’s opinion in Dobbs would allow states to take abortion off the table in every case. Some will. That isn’t right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think this decision would force parents to allow invasive medical care for infants that are born with severe medical problems? I can see that happening. If you forced me to give birth to a child I knew had very little chance, could you force me to make that child suffer through surgeries and other interventions after birth?

This is all so messed up.

I doubt it. It's well-established that forced-birthers don't give a f** about babies after they are born.

No more a fact than if I claimed that abortionists like you don't care if babies live or die.

Actually completely different. An embryo is not a baby.

Fine. Abortionists like you can say you're pregnant with an embryo. Women i know say they're pregnant with a baby.

I am pro-choice and my BIL was pro-life. We both call our pregnancies “the baby”. One day, in SIL’s third trimester, BIL & SIL found out that the baby was developing without any brain. There was no hope that the baby would ever do more than live in a vegetative state for an undetermined amount of time - days, weeks, months, maybe a couple of years at best. The baby would require around the clock care-giving. BIL and SIL chose to have an abortion.

People who have abortions sometimes are aborting babies - they are often wanted pregnancies until something goes catastrophically wrong. BIL and SIL made the best possible choice for them and their future family, which includes 3 more babies that they had after their abortion. Babies that they never would have had but for abortion.

Abortion is pro-life, but it includes not only thinking about whether the baby lives or dies, but also what kind of quality of life the baby and family would have.

PP here. I'm very much in agreement that many abortions are needed and appropriate. I'm not opposed and think a woman and her doctor and the father of the baby (if involved) should decide. I'm opposed to abortions on demand

What exactly is an “abortion on demand”? Will calling it “abortion on request” change your view?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think this decision would force parents to allow invasive medical care for infants that are born with severe medical problems? I can see that happening. If you forced me to give birth to a child I knew had very little chance, could you force me to make that child suffer through surgeries and other interventions after birth?

This is all so messed up.

I doubt it. It's well-established that forced-birthers don't give a f** about babies after they are born.

No more a fact than if I claimed that abortionists like you don't care if babies live or die.

Actually completely different. An embryo is not a baby.

Fine. Abortionists like you can say you're pregnant with an embryo. Women i know say they're pregnant with a baby.

I am pro-choice and my BIL was pro-life. We both call our pregnancies “the baby”. One day, in SIL’s third trimester, BIL & SIL found out that the baby was developing without any brain. There was no hope that the baby would ever do more than live in a vegetative state for an undetermined amount of time - days, weeks, months, maybe a couple of years at best. The baby would require around the clock care-giving. BIL and SIL chose to have an abortion.

People who have abortions sometimes are aborting babies - they are often wanted pregnancies until something goes catastrophically wrong. BIL and SIL made the best possible choice for them and their future family, which includes 3 more babies that they had after their abortion. Babies that they never would have had but for abortion.

Abortion is pro-life, but it includes not only thinking about whether the baby lives or dies, but also what kind of quality of life the baby and family would have.

PP here. I'm very much in agreement that many abortions are needed and appropriate. I'm not opposed and think a woman and her doctor and the father of the baby (if involved) should decide. I'm opposed to abortions on demand

Can you explain the difference in your mind between “deciding” and “demanding”?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think this decision would force parents to allow invasive medical care for infants that are born with severe medical problems? I can see that happening. If you forced me to give birth to a child I knew had very little chance, could you force me to make that child suffer through surgeries and other interventions after birth?

This is all so messed up.

I doubt it. It's well-established that forced-birthers don't give a f** about babies after they are born.

No more a fact than if I claimed that abortionists like you don't care if babies live or die.

Actually completely different. An embryo is not a baby.

Fine. Abortionists like you can say you're pregnant with an embryo. Women i know say they're pregnant with a baby.

I am pro-choice and my BIL was pro-life. We both call our pregnancies “the baby”. One day, in SIL’s third trimester, BIL & SIL found out that the baby was developing without any brain. There was no hope that the baby would ever do more than live in a vegetative state for an undetermined amount of time - days, weeks, months, maybe a couple of years at best. The baby would require around the clock care-giving. BIL and SIL chose to have an abortion.

People who have abortions sometimes are aborting babies - they are often wanted pregnancies until something goes catastrophically wrong. BIL and SIL made the best possible choice for them and their future family, which includes 3 more babies that they had after their abortion. Babies that they never would have had but for abortion.

Abortion is pro-life, but it includes not only thinking about whether the baby lives or dies, but also what kind of quality of life the baby and family would have.

PP here. I'm very much in agreement that many abortions are needed and appropriate. I'm not opposed and think a woman and her doctor and the father of the baby (if involved) should decide. I'm opposed to abortions on demand

My SIL needed an “abortion on demand”. Thank god she didn’t have to justify her decision to abort. There was no one to get to sign off on the abortion, no one to judge whether the baby was anencephalic enough to have an abortion, etc. Had she had to jump through hoops to justify her abortion it would have taken even longer to arrange and thus been at an even later time in the third trimester and she would have been even more traumatized.

When you say you are opposed to “abortions on demand”, you are opposed to women making the choice for themselves because you think there are just some bad women out there who are irresponsible and decide on a whim for some unjustifiable reason (to you) to get an abortion at the last minute.
A third trimester abortion costs something like $25k, takes 3-4 days and you have to travel to like one of 4 states in the country that actually does it. Also less than 1% of all abortions are after 20 weeks, which in 2019 was something like 8-9000 abortions. Women aren’t having 3rd term abortions on a whim.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think this decision would force parents to allow invasive medical care for infants that are born with severe medical problems? I can see that happening. If you forced me to give birth to a child I knew had very little chance, could you force me to make that child suffer through surgeries and other interventions after birth?

This is all so messed up.

I doubt it. It's well-established that forced-birthers don't give a f** about babies after they are born.

No more a fact than if I claimed that abortionists like you don't care if babies live or die.

Actually completely different. An embryo is not a baby.

Fine. Abortionists like you can say you're pregnant with an embryo. Women i know say they're pregnant with a baby.

I am pro-choice and my BIL was pro-life. We both call our pregnancies “the baby”. One day, in SIL’s third trimester, BIL & SIL found out that the baby was developing without any brain. There was no hope that the baby would ever do more than live in a vegetative state for an undetermined amount of time - days, weeks, months, maybe a couple of years at best. The baby would require around the clock care-giving. BIL and SIL chose to have an abortion.

People who have abortions sometimes are aborting babies - they are often wanted pregnancies until something goes catastrophically wrong. BIL and SIL made the best possible choice for them and their future family, which includes 3 more babies that they had after their abortion. Babies that they never would have had but for abortion.

Abortion is pro-life, but it includes not only thinking about whether the baby lives or dies, but also what kind of quality of life the baby and family would have.

PP here. I'm very much in agreement that many abortions are needed and appropriate. I'm not opposed and think a woman and her doctor and the father of the baby (if involved) should decide. I'm opposed to abortions on demand

Abortions on demand are not a thing and have never been a thing.
Please learn to read about Roe versus Wade and the Casey decisions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think this decision would force parents to allow invasive medical care for infants that are born with severe medical problems? I can see that happening. If you forced me to give birth to a child I knew had very little chance, could you force me to make that child suffer through surgeries and other interventions after birth?

This is all so messed up.

I doubt it. It's well-established that forced-birthers don't give a f** about babies after they are born.

No more a fact than if I claimed that abortionists like you don't care if babies live or die.

Actually completely different. An embryo is not a baby.

Fine. Abortionists like you can say you're pregnant with an embryo. Women i know say they're pregnant with a baby.

I am pro-choice and my BIL was pro-life. We both call our pregnancies “the baby”. One day, in SIL’s third trimester, BIL & SIL found out that the baby was developing without any brain. There was no hope that the baby would ever do more than live in a vegetative state for an undetermined amount of time - days, weeks, months, maybe a couple of years at best. The baby would require around the clock care-giving. BIL and SIL chose to have an abortion.

People who have abortions sometimes are aborting babies - they are often wanted pregnancies until something goes catastrophically wrong. BIL and SIL made the best possible choice for them and their future family, which includes 3 more babies that they had after their abortion. Babies that they never would have had but for abortion.

Abortion is pro-life, but it includes not only thinking about whether the baby lives or dies, but also what kind of quality of life the baby and family would have.

PP here. I'm very much in agreement that many abortions are needed and appropriate. I'm not opposed and think a woman and her doctor and the father of the baby (if involved) should decide. I'm opposed to abortions on demand

Same. I am fine with abortions up to 12 weeks, maybe a bit more. And abortions at any stage foe medical issues like this story. 5 years ago, I would have been considered pro choice. But now, favoring any restrictions makes you prolife, so I guess thats where Im at now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think this decision would force parents to allow invasive medical care for infants that are born with severe medical problems? I can see that happening. If you forced me to give birth to a child I knew had very little chance, could you force me to make that child suffer through surgeries and other interventions after birth?

This is all so messed up.

I doubt it. It's well-established that forced-birthers don't give a f** about babies after they are born.

No more a fact than if I claimed that abortionists like you don't care if babies live or die.

Actually completely different. An embryo is not a baby.

Fine. Abortionists like you can say you're pregnant with an embryo. Women i know say they're pregnant with a baby.

I am pro-choice and my BIL was pro-life. We both call our pregnancies “the baby”. One day, in SIL’s third trimester, BIL & SIL found out that the baby was developing without any brain. There was no hope that the baby would ever do more than live in a vegetative state for an undetermined amount of time - days, weeks, months, maybe a couple of years at best. The baby would require around the clock care-giving. BIL and SIL chose to have an abortion.

People who have abortions sometimes are aborting babies - they are often wanted pregnancies until something goes catastrophically wrong. BIL and SIL made the best possible choice for them and their future family, which includes 3 more babies that they had after their abortion. Babies that they never would have had but for abortion.

Abortion is pro-life, but it includes not only thinking about whether the baby lives or dies, but also what kind of quality of life the baby and family would have.

PP here. I'm very much in agreement that many abortions are needed and appropriate. I'm not opposed and think a woman and her doctor and the father of the baby (if involved) should decide. I'm opposed to abortions on demand

Same. I am fine with abortions up to 12 weeks, maybe a bit more. And abortions at any stage foe medical issues like this story. 5 years ago, I would have been considered pro choice. But now, favoring any restrictions makes you prolife, so I guess thats where Im at now.

This argument is so disingenuous. Who decides whether there is sufficient medical justification? What standard do they have to meet? What happens if the state decides to seize the woman’s medical records and disagrees with her doctor that there was sufficient medical reason.

I don’t actually expect answers to those questions, because people like you always dodge the hard questions. It’s pathetic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think this decision would force parents to allow invasive medical care for infants that are born with severe medical problems? I can see that happening. If you forced me to give birth to a child I knew had very little chance, could you force me to make that child suffer through surgeries and other interventions after birth?

This is all so messed up.

I doubt it. It's well-established that forced-birthers don't give a f** about babies after they are born.

No more a fact than if I claimed that abortionists like you don't care if babies live or die.

Actually completely different. An embryo is not a baby.

Fine. Abortionists like you can say you're pregnant with an embryo. Women i know say they're pregnant with a baby.

I am pro-choice and my BIL was pro-life. We both call our pregnancies “the baby”. One day, in SIL’s third trimester, BIL & SIL found out that the baby was developing without any brain. There was no hope that the baby would ever do more than live in a vegetative state for an undetermined amount of time - days, weeks, months, maybe a couple of years at best. The baby would require around the clock care-giving. BIL and SIL chose to have an abortion.

People who have abortions sometimes are aborting babies - they are often wanted pregnancies until something goes catastrophically wrong. BIL and SIL made the best possible choice for them and their future family, which includes 3 more babies that they had after their abortion. Babies that they never would have had but for abortion.

Abortion is pro-life, but it includes not only thinking about whether the baby lives or dies, but also what kind of quality of life the baby and family would have.

PP here. I'm very much in agreement that many abortions are needed and appropriate. I'm not opposed and think a woman and her doctor and the father of the baby (if involved) should decide. I'm opposed to abortions on demand

Same. I am fine with abortions up to 12 weeks, maybe a bit more. And abortions at any stage foe medical issues like this story. 5 years ago, I would have been considered pro choice. But now, favoring any restrictions makes you prolife, so I guess thats where Im at now.

Great. Don’t have an abortion before 12 weeks. You don’t get to decide for anyone else though.