Abortion messaging needs to change

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A 16-week abortion ban is a very smart compromise that will get support from both sides. Currently, only 15 of 193 U.N. Member Countries allow elective abortion after the 15th week of pregnancy, so the U.S. is a major outlier where many states still allow elective abortion until birth.

No. You are wrong.
Most Americans believe abortion shouldn’t be regulated at all.
They don’t want limits placed on it.
Roughly 75% of Americans think up to 24 weeks for any reason,
25% think a 16 week ban is acceptable.


https://apnews.com/article/abortion-trump-biden-election-2024-dobbs-498d14f6e2bbfe1f313f006ad089de4e

Your own link shows that’s not true
“About half of those who say a woman should be able to get an abortion for any reason also say their state should not allow abortion after 24 weeks of pregnancy and about one-quarter say their state should not allow abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy.”

One quarter is 25%. How dumb are you?
Seriously?
Only 25% of the electorate agrees with a 16 week ban. It’s hard to accept that you are freakish outlier, but you are.

National limits on abortion are the only way that abortion of any kind can be federally permitted.

Unfettered access to abortion past the point of viability is simply politically dead in the water.

And if you currently live in a state with a ban past 15 weeks and don’t like it, move. It’s not that difficult. You can pack a bag and ride a bus into a state with no limits on abortion.

Why? There’s no national ban now. I thought Dobbs was about returning it to the states? Hate to break it to you that NY and California are as much states as Texas and Florida.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A 16-week abortion ban is a very smart compromise that will get support from both sides. Currently, only 15 of 193 U.N. Member Countries allow elective abortion after the 15th week of pregnancy, so the U.S. is a major outlier where many states still allow elective abortion until birth.

No. You are wrong.
Most Americans believe abortion shouldn’t be regulated at all.
They don’t want limits placed on it.
Roughly 75% of Americans think up to 24 weeks for any reason,
25% think a 16 week ban is acceptable.


https://apnews.com/article/abortion-trump-biden-election-2024-dobbs-498d14f6e2bbfe1f313f006ad089de4e

Your own link shows that’s not true
“About half of those who say a woman should be able to get an abortion for any reason also say their state should not allow abortion after 24 weeks of pregnancy and about one-quarter say their state should not allow abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy.”

One quarter is 25%. How dumb are you?
Seriously?
Only 25% of the electorate agrees with a 16 week ban. It’s hard to accept that you are freakish outlier, but you are.

National limits on abortion are the only way that abortion of any kind can be federally permitted.

Unfettered access to abortion past the point of viability is simply politically dead in the water.

And if you currently live in a state with a ban past 15 weeks and don’t like it, move. It’s not that difficult. You can pack a bag and ride a bus into a state with no limits on abortion.

Wow, are you ever an out-of-touch elitist! This is why people cannot relate to the modern GOP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A 16-week abortion ban is a very smart compromise that will get support from both sides. Currently, only 15 of 193 U.N. Member Countries allow elective abortion after the 15th week of pregnancy, so the U.S. is a major outlier where many states still allow elective abortion until birth.

So you believe woman who discovers a catastrophic condition at 17 weeks for either herself or her fetus should be forced to carry it to 40 weeks? Is that what you are saying? Because that’s what I hear you say.

Who is discovering a ‘catastrophic’ condition at 17 weeks?

If you’ve had a baby in the last twenty years, you’d have known that all ‘catastrophic’ diagnoses are discoverable in the first 15 weeks now with current, widely available prenatal care.

Is this poster stupid or a liar?
What do we think?

A liar.

Someone upthread was talking about all the very many elective third trimester abortions she claimed were happening all the time (spoiler alert: they were not). A few of the women in the study found out at the 20 week ultrasound that their fetus had problems, but the extent was not revealed until a scan at 28 weeks, at which point Miss “All ‘catastrophic’ diagnoses” up there would have shamed the woman for having had an abortion.

Maybe the forced birthers need to change their messaging. Anyone vile enough to refer to diagnoses as “catastrophic” as if that’s a joke and a loop hole for sluts to have abortions at 40 works need to… well what goes around comes around.

Yes there are lots of medical reasons that make abortion necessary. However, every thread on this forum eventually has someone saying it is inconvenient for some women to have a child. This is why most abortions appen. And the drop in these numbers is why the bans in some states has led to more births, according to Kaiser. Estimated about half the reduction was abortions out of state.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A 16-week abortion ban is a very smart compromise that will get support from both sides. Currently, only 15 of 193 U.N. Member Countries allow elective abortion after the 15th week of pregnancy, so the U.S. is a major outlier where many states still allow elective abortion until birth.

No. You are wrong.
Most Americans believe abortion shouldn’t be regulated at all.
They don’t want limits placed on it.
Roughly 75% of Americans think up to 24 weeks for any reason,
25% think a 16 week ban is acceptable.


https://apnews.com/article/abortion-trump-biden-election-2024-dobbs-498d14f6e2bbfe1f313f006ad089de4e

Your own link shows that’s not true
“About half of those who say a woman should be able to get an abortion for any reason also say their state should not allow abortion after 24 weeks of pregnancy and about one-quarter say their state should not allow abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy.”

One quarter is 25%. How dumb are you?
Seriously?
Only 25% of the electorate agrees with a 16 week ban. It’s hard to accept that you are freakish outlier, but you are.

National limits on abortion are the only way that abortion of any kind can be federally permitted.

Unfettered access to abortion past the point of viability is simply politically dead in the water.

And if you currently live in a state with a ban past 15 weeks and don’t like it, move. It’s not that difficult. You can pack a bag and ride a bus into a state with no limits on abortion.

Why? There’s no national ban now. I thought Dobbs was about returning it to the states? Hate to break it to you that NY and California are as much states as Texas and Florida.

I thought Democrats wanted abortion rights to be federally protected. My mistake.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A 16-week abortion ban is a very smart compromise that will get support from both sides. Currently, only 15 of 193 U.N. Member Countries allow elective abortion after the 15th week of pregnancy, so the U.S. is a major outlier where many states still allow elective abortion until birth.

So you believe woman who discovers a catastrophic condition at 17 weeks for either herself or her fetus should be forced to carry it to 40 weeks? Is that what you are saying? Because that’s what I hear you say.

Who is discovering a ‘catastrophic’ condition at 17 weeks?

If you’ve had a baby in the last twenty years, you’d have known that all ‘catastrophic’ diagnoses are discoverable in the first 15 weeks now with current, widely available prenatal care.

Is this poster stupid or a liar?
What do we think?

A liar.

Someone upthread was talking about all the very many elective third trimester abortions she claimed were happening all the time (spoiler alert: they were not). A few of the women in the study found out at the 20 week ultrasound that their fetus had problems, but the extent was not revealed until a scan at 28 weeks, at which point Miss “All ‘catastrophic’ diagnoses” up there would have shamed the woman for having had an abortion.

Maybe the forced birthers need to change their messaging. Anyone vile enough to refer to diagnoses as “catastrophic” as if that’s a joke and a loop hole for sluts to have abortions at 40 works need to… well what goes around comes around.

Yes there are lots of medical reasons that make abortion necessary. However, every thread on this forum eventually has someone saying it is inconvenient for some women to have a child. This is why most abortions appen. And the drop in these numbers is why the bans in some states has led to more births, according to Kaiser. Estimated about half the reduction was abortions out of state.

Heartbreaking to think of women’s lives being upended by that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A 16-week abortion ban is a very smart compromise that will get support from both sides. Currently, only 15 of 193 U.N. Member Countries allow elective abortion after the 15th week of pregnancy, so the U.S. is a major outlier where many states still allow elective abortion until birth.

No. You are wrong.
Most Americans believe abortion shouldn’t be regulated at all.
They don’t want limits placed on it.
Roughly 75% of Americans think up to 24 weeks for any reason,
25% think a 16 week ban is acceptable.


https://apnews.com/article/abortion-trump-biden-election-2024-dobbs-498d14f6e2bbfe1f313f006ad089de4e

Your own link shows that’s not true
“About half of those who say a woman should be able to get an abortion for any reason also say their state should not allow abortion after 24 weeks of pregnancy and about one-quarter say their state should not allow abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy.”

One quarter is 25%. How dumb are you?
Seriously?
Only 25% of the electorate agrees with a 16 week ban. It’s hard to accept that you are freakish outlier, but you are.

National limits on abortion are the only way that abortion of any kind can be federally permitted.

Unfettered access to abortion past the point of viability is simply politically dead in the water.

And if you currently live in a state with a ban past 15 weeks and don’t like it, move. It’s not that difficult. You can pack a bag and ride a bus into a state with no limits on abortion.

Why? There’s no national ban now. I thought Dobbs was about returning it to the states? Hate to break it to you that NY and California are as much states as Texas and Florida.

I thought Democrats wanted abortion rights to be federally protected. My mistake.

A ban isn’t federal protection because no one discussing a federal ban intends to overrule lower state limits— they’re setting a ceiling not a floor like Roe. In these circumstances better to leave it to states.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A 16-week abortion ban is a very smart compromise that will get support from both sides. Currently, only 15 of 193 U.N. Member Countries allow elective abortion after the 15th week of pregnancy, so the U.S. is a major outlier where many states still allow elective abortion until birth.

No. You are wrong.
Most Americans believe abortion shouldn’t be regulated at all.
They don’t want limits placed on it.
Roughly 75% of Americans think up to 24 weeks for any reason,
25% think a 16 week ban is acceptable.


https://apnews.com/article/abortion-trump-biden-election-2024-dobbs-498d14f6e2bbfe1f313f006ad089de4e

Your own link shows that’s not true
“About half of those who say a woman should be able to get an abortion for any reason also say their state should not allow abortion after 24 weeks of pregnancy and about one-quarter say their state should not allow abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy.”

One quarter is 25%. How dumb are you?
Seriously?
Only 25% of the electorate agrees with a 16 week ban. It’s hard to accept that you are freakish outlier, but you are.

National limits on abortion are the only way that abortion of any kind can be federally permitted.

Unfettered access to abortion past the point of viability is simply politically dead in the water.

And if you currently live in a state with a ban past 15 weeks and don’t like it, move. It’s not that difficult. You can pack a bag and ride a bus into a state with no limits on abortion.

Wow, are you ever an out-of-touch elitist! This is why people cannot relate to the modern GOP.

+1

Republicans act like they’re entitled to our votes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A 16-week abortion ban is a very smart compromise that will get support from both sides. Currently, only 15 of 193 U.N. Member Countries allow elective abortion after the 15th week of pregnancy, so the U.S. is a major outlier where many states still allow elective abortion until birth.

So you believe woman who discovers a catastrophic condition at 17 weeks for either herself or her fetus should be forced to carry it to 40 weeks? Is that what you are saying? Because that’s what I hear you say.

Who is discovering a ‘catastrophic’ condition at 17 weeks?

If you’ve had a baby in the last twenty years, you’d have known that all ‘catastrophic’ diagnoses are discoverable in the first 15 weeks now with current, widely available prenatal care.

Is this poster stupid or a liar?
What do we think?

A liar.

Someone upthread was talking about all the very many elective third trimester abortions she claimed were happening all the time (spoiler alert: they were not). A few of the women in the study found out at the 20 week ultrasound that their fetus had problems, but the extent was not revealed until a scan at 28 weeks, at which point Miss “All ‘catastrophic’ diagnoses” up there would have shamed the woman for having had an abortion.

Maybe the forced birthers need to change their messaging. Anyone vile enough to refer to diagnoses as “catastrophic” as if that’s a joke and a loop hole for sluts to have abortions at 40 works need to… well what goes around comes around.

Yes there are lots of medical reasons that make abortion necessary. However, every thread on this forum eventually has someone saying it is inconvenient for some women to have a child. This is why most abortions appen. […]

Have you ever googled the Turnaway Study? When you say “inconvenient” I think what you mean is “interferes with my nail appointments” but what it actually means is “my boyfriend is getting controlling.” “I finally recovered from the birth of my third; I cannot go through that again so soon.” “I have two years left to my degree; I am not going back to a minimum wage job.” “I’m sixteen.” Women who are denied abortions end up poorer, less educated more likely to be in violent relationships. In short when a woman knows she doesn’t want to be pregnant and give birth, it’s for a good reason, even if you would reduce it to “convenience.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A 16-week abortion ban is a very smart compromise that will get support from both sides. Currently, only 15 of 193 U.N. Member Countries allow elective abortion after the 15th week of pregnancy, so the U.S. is a major outlier where many states still allow elective abortion until birth.

So you believe woman who discovers a catastrophic condition at 17 weeks for either herself or her fetus should be forced to carry it to 40 weeks? Is that what you are saying? Because that’s what I hear you say.

Who is discovering a ‘catastrophic’ condition at 17 weeks?

If you’ve had a baby in the last twenty years, you’d have known that all ‘catastrophic’ diagnoses are discoverable in the first 15 weeks now with current, widely available prenatal care.

Is this poster stupid or a liar?
What do we think?

A liar.

Someone upthread was talking about all the very many elective third trimester abortions she claimed were happening all the time (spoiler alert: they were not). A few of the women in the study found out at the 20 week ultrasound that their fetus had problems, but the extent was not revealed until a scan at 28 weeks, at which point Miss “All ‘catastrophic’ diagnoses” up there would have shamed the woman for having had an abortion.

Maybe the forced birthers need to change their messaging. Anyone vile enough to refer to diagnoses as “catastrophic” as if that’s a joke and a loop hole for sluts to have abortions at 40 works need to… well what goes around comes around.

Yes there are lots of medical reasons that make abortion necessary. However, every thread on this forum eventually has someone saying it is inconvenient for some women to have a child. This is why most abortions appen. […]

Have you ever googled the Turnaway Study? When you say “inconvenient” I think what you mean is “interferes with my nail appointments” but what it actually means is “my boyfriend is getting controlling.” “I finally recovered from the birth of my third; I cannot go through that again so soon.” “I have two years left to my degree; I am not going back to a minimum wage job.” “I’m sixteen.” Women who are denied abortions end up poorer, less educated more likely to be in violent relationships. In short when a woman knows she doesn’t want to be pregnant and give birth, it’s for a good reason, even if you would reduce it to “convenience.”

I think in these circumstances the state has an interest in considering the life of the baby.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A 16-week abortion ban is a very smart compromise that will get support from both sides. Currently, only 15 of 193 U.N. Member Countries allow elective abortion after the 15th week of pregnancy, so the U.S. is a major outlier where many states still allow elective abortion until birth.

So you believe woman who discovers a catastrophic condition at 17 weeks for either herself or her fetus should be forced to carry it to 40 weeks? Is that what you are saying? Because that’s what I hear you say.

Who is discovering a ‘catastrophic’ condition at 17 weeks?

If you’ve had a baby in the last twenty years, you’d have known that all ‘catastrophic’ diagnoses are discoverable in the first 15 weeks now with current, widely available prenatal care.

Is this poster stupid or a liar?
What do we think?

A liar.

Someone upthread was talking about all the very many elective third trimester abortions she claimed were happening all the time (spoiler alert: they were not). A few of the women in the study found out at the 20 week ultrasound that their fetus had problems, but the extent was not revealed until a scan at 28 weeks, at which point Miss “All ‘catastrophic’ diagnoses” up there would have shamed the woman for having had an abortion.

Maybe the forced birthers need to change their messaging. Anyone vile enough to refer to diagnoses as “catastrophic” as if that’s a joke and a loop hole for sluts to have abortions at 40 works need to… well what goes around comes around.

Yes there are lots of medical reasons that make abortion necessary. However, every thread on this forum eventually has someone saying it is inconvenient for some women to have a child. This is why most abortions appen. […]

Have you ever googled the Turnaway Study? When you say “inconvenient” I think what you mean is “interferes with my nail appointments” but what it actually means is “my boyfriend is getting controlling.” “I finally recovered from the birth of my third; I cannot go through that again so soon.” “I have two years left to my degree; I am not going back to a minimum wage job.” “I’m sixteen.” Women who are denied abortions end up poorer, less educated more likely to be in violent relationships. In short when a woman knows she doesn’t want to be pregnant and give birth, it’s for a good reason, even if you would reduce it to “convenience.”

I think in these circumstances the state has an interest in considering the life of the baby.

And the woman who is a living breathing person has her own interests that are above and beyond big government inteference. It’s a matter of liberty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A 16-week abortion ban is a very smart compromise that will get support from both sides. Currently, only 15 of 193 U.N. Member Countries allow elective abortion after the 15th week of pregnancy, so the U.S. is a major outlier where many states still allow elective abortion until birth.

So you believe woman who discovers a catastrophic condition at 17 weeks for either herself or her fetus should be forced to carry it to 40 weeks? Is that what you are saying? Because that’s what I hear you say.

Who is discovering a ‘catastrophic’ condition at 17 weeks?

If you’ve had a baby in the last twenty years, you’d have known that all ‘catastrophic’ diagnoses are discoverable in the first 15 weeks now with current, widely available prenatal care.

Is this poster stupid or a liar?
What do we think?

A liar.

Someone upthread was talking about all the very many elective third trimester abortions she claimed were happening all the time (spoiler alert: they were not). A few of the women in the study found out at the 20 week ultrasound that their fetus had problems, but the extent was not revealed until a scan at 28 weeks, at which point Miss “All ‘catastrophic’ diagnoses” up there would have shamed the woman for having had an abortion.

Maybe the forced birthers need to change their messaging. Anyone vile enough to refer to diagnoses as “catastrophic” as if that’s a joke and a loop hole for sluts to have abortions at 40 works need to… well what goes around comes around.

Yes there are lots of medical reasons that make abortion necessary. However, every thread on this forum eventually has someone saying it is inconvenient for some women to have a child. This is why most abortions appen. […]

Have you ever googled the Turnaway Study? When you say “inconvenient” I think what you mean is “interferes with my nail appointments” but what it actually means is “my boyfriend is getting controlling.” “I finally recovered from the birth of my third; I cannot go through that again so soon.” “I have two years left to my degree; I am not going back to a minimum wage job.” “I’m sixteen.” Women who are denied abortions end up poorer, less educated more likely to be in violent relationships. In short when a woman knows she doesn’t want to be pregnant and give birth, it’s for a good reason, even if you would reduce it to “convenience.”

I think in these circumstances the state has an interest in considering the life of the baby.

Your indifference to human suffering is disappointing. And I bet you won’t even google the Turnaway Study. The name is right there and it has a little easy to read breakdown of the kind of poverty and suffering that a denied abortion means for both the woman and the resulting child.

You’re breathtakingly cruel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A 16-week abortion ban is a very smart compromise that will get support from both sides. Currently, only 15 of 193 U.N. Member Countries allow elective abortion after the 15th week of pregnancy, so the U.S. is a major outlier where many states still allow elective abortion until birth.

So you believe woman who discovers a catastrophic condition at 17 weeks for either herself or her fetus should be forced to carry it to 40 weeks? Is that what you are saying? Because that’s what I hear you say.

Who is discovering a ‘catastrophic’ condition at 17 weeks?

If you’ve had a baby in the last twenty years, you’d have known that all ‘catastrophic’ diagnoses are discoverable in the first 15 weeks now with current, widely available prenatal care.

Is this poster stupid or a liar?
What do we think?

A liar.

Someone upthread was talking about all the very many elective third trimester abortions she claimed were happening all the time (spoiler alert: they were not). A few of the women in the study found out at the 20 week ultrasound that their fetus had problems, but the extent was not revealed until a scan at 28 weeks, at which point Miss “All ‘catastrophic’ diagnoses” up there would have shamed the woman for having had an abortion.

Maybe the forced birthers need to change their messaging. Anyone vile enough to refer to diagnoses as “catastrophic” as if that’s a joke and a loop hole for sluts to have abortions at 40 works need to… well what goes around comes around.

Yes there are lots of medical reasons that make abortion necessary. However, every thread on this forum eventually has someone saying it is inconvenient for some women to have a child. This is why most abortions appen. […]

Have you ever googled the Turnaway Study? When you say “inconvenient” I think what you mean is “interferes with my nail appointments” but what it actually means is “my boyfriend is getting controlling.” “I finally recovered from the birth of my third; I cannot go through that again so soon.” “I have two years left to my degree; I am not going back to a minimum wage job.” “I’m sixteen.” Women who are denied abortions end up poorer, less educated more likely to be in violent relationships. In short when a woman knows she doesn’t want to be pregnant and give birth, it’s for a good reason, even if you would reduce it to “convenience.”

I think in these circumstances the state has an interest in considering the life of the baby.

And the woman who is a living breathing person has her own interests that are above and beyond big government inteference. It’s a matter of liberty.

Altogether: “women aren’t people in the GOP.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I appreciated your point, OP, and I believe what you say.
I’m one who is pro abortion, not a Christian, and there are many of us too, but the ostracism of talking about that in America?!
I can’t even fathom the right’s stance and therefore, have a hard time even glancing in that direction to start a conversation.
I wish the dems had a better message about it as well.

I am not "pro-abortion." I'm completely against abortion. I would never have an abortion.

But I'm not going to tell other women what they can do with their bodies.

There are many cases where abortion is warranted and necessary:

If a woman needs an abortion for medical reasons, that's a decision she and her doctor need to make.

If a child is raped, that child should not be forced to carry a child. That child should have access to abortion.

If a woman is raped, that woman should not be forced to carry her rapist's child.

Abortion should not be used as a means of birth control, but birth control should be 100% better--completely safe and 100% foolproof.

Accidental, unwanted pregnancies happen, and when that happens, women should not be forced to give birth to a child they do not want.

Abortion is a terrible thing, but it's necessary at times. I am not going to judge other women who need to have an abortion, nor will I stop them, and I don't think the SCOTUS and the mostly male-controlled state legislatures should stop them either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A 16-week abortion ban is a very smart compromise that will get support from both sides. Currently, only 15 of 193 U.N. Member Countries allow elective abortion after the 15th week of pregnancy, so the U.S. is a major outlier where many states still allow elective abortion until birth.

So you believe woman who discovers a catastrophic condition at 17 weeks for either herself or her fetus should be forced to carry it to 40 weeks? Is that what you are saying? Because that’s what I hear you say.

Who is discovering a ‘catastrophic’ condition at 17 weeks?

If you’ve had a baby in the last twenty years, you’d have known that all ‘catastrophic’ diagnoses are discoverable in the first 15 weeks now with current, widely available prenatal care.

Is this poster stupid or a liar?
What do we think?

A liar.

Someone upthread was talking about all the very many elective third trimester abortions she claimed were happening all the time (spoiler alert: they were not). A few of the women in the study found out at the 20 week ultrasound that their fetus had problems, but the extent was not revealed until a scan at 28 weeks, at which point Miss “All ‘catastrophic’ diagnoses” up there would have shamed the woman for having had an abortion.

Maybe the forced birthers need to change their messaging. Anyone vile enough to refer to diagnoses as “catastrophic” as if that’s a joke and a loop hole for sluts to have abortions at 40 works need to… well what goes around comes around.

Yes there are lots of medical reasons that make abortion necessary. However, every thread on this forum eventually has someone saying it is inconvenient for some women to have a child. This is why most abortions appen. […]

Have you ever googled the Turnaway Study? When you say “inconvenient” I think what you mean is “interferes with my nail appointments” but what it actually means is “my boyfriend is getting controlling.” “I finally recovered from the birth of my third; I cannot go through that again so soon.” “I have two years left to my degree; I am not going back to a minimum wage job.” “I’m sixteen.” Women who are denied abortions end up poorer, less educated more likely to be in violent relationships. In short when a woman knows she doesn’t want to be pregnant and give birth, it’s for a good reason, even if you would reduce it to “convenience.”

I think in these circumstances the state has an interest in considering the life of the baby.

And the woman who is a living breathing person has her own interests that are above and beyond big government inteference. It’s a matter of liberty.

Altogether: “women aren’t people in the GOP.”

Women are pro life too. You just disagree with them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A 16-week abortion ban is a very smart compromise that will get support from both sides. Currently, only 15 of 193 U.N. Member Countries allow elective abortion after the 15th week of pregnancy, so the U.S. is a major outlier where many states still allow elective abortion until birth.

No. You are wrong.
Most Americans believe abortion shouldn’t be regulated at all.
They don’t want limits placed on it.
Roughly 75% of Americans think up to 24 weeks for any reason,
25% think a 16 week ban is acceptable.


https://apnews.com/article/abortion-trump-biden-election-2024-dobbs-498d14f6e2bbfe1f313f006ad089de4e

Your own link shows that’s not true
“About half of those who say a woman should be able to get an abortion for any reason also say their state should not allow abortion after 24 weeks of pregnancy and about one-quarter say their state should not allow abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy.”

One quarter is 25%. How dumb are you?
Seriously?
Only 25% of the electorate agrees with a 16 week ban. It’s hard to accept that you are freakish outlier, but you are.

National limits on abortion are the only way that abortion of any kind can be federally permitted.

Unfettered access to abortion past the point of viability is simply politically dead in the water.

And if you currently live in a state with a ban past 15 weeks and don’t like it, move. It’s not that difficult. You can pack a bag and ride a bus into a state with no limits on abortion.

Why? There’s no national ban now. I thought Dobbs was about returning it to the states? Hate to break it to you that NY and California are as much states as Texas and Florida.

I thought Democrats wanted abortion rights to be federally protected. My mistake.

A ban isn’t federal protection because no one discussing a federal ban intends to overrule lower state limits— they’re setting a ceiling not a floor like Roe. In these circumstances better to leave it to states.

+1 The federal 15-week ban proposed by GOP Senators ABSOLUTELY affected states where abortion was legal after that and did not improve abortion access in the state with total bans.