Official Abortion Thread

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:These new laws all ignore contemporary society and what has changed since the 60s and Roe v Wade became law. Its laughable really. Don't have sex until you can support a child? LOL. I guess 80% of men better give up all hope of ever having sex they don't have to pay for then....

Actually nothing has changed. It is quite sad. Humans, ultimately, are mammals. Out instinct is to procreate at the base level. The difference is, we also have intellect and can manage these things as needed. It is only the moral imposition by certain people, the steep minority actually, who are imposing their construct on the rest of the country. It is purely tyranny of the minority. Combine this with the total hypocricy of people like Jerry Falwell, Jr and you have a recipe for undermining the moral majortiy (it is neither) movement for a generation. They are showing they are no better than the Taliban.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^Disagreeing with you is ignorant and not allowed? Are you the internet police? No one ever told you that you can get pregnant every single time you have sex and yeah a partner can leave/hit you/whatever? That never occurred to you? And if your state had banned abortion, you really couldn’t have come up with $50 to get to another state? Maybe you shouldn’t have been doing it then.

Discussing abortion in a political forum without knowing what Guttmacher is is ignorant. You do know what ignorant means, right?

I think having sex when you can’t 100% take responsibility for a baby on your own is irresponsible. You know what irresponsible means, right? And then justifying getting rid of said baby because it was an inconvenience, well — we know what kind of person you are.

Cool. So can I make laws about what I find irresponsible in your life, and jail you if you don't comply? Because you really shouldn't have eaten those fries or ordered that soda. Wait--it was convenient for you? Even more of a reason to ban your irresponsible, harmful behavior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LOL at the PP saying that “people” shouldn’t be having sex if they aren’t 100% ready to have a child.

Come on, now. We all know you are referring to women. You think that WOMEN shouldn’t be having sex unless they are 100% ready to have a child. Because this reasoning will never deter men from having sex. Ever.

Well yeah the woman has the baby inside her and can only change that with medical intervention. A man - while he shouldn’t - can walk away and no one is the wiser. Might be unfair but it’s pragmstic that the person carrying the baby needs to carry greater responsibility bc there’s always a chance she’ll end up the solo parent. Is your problem that it’s unfair that the woman must carry the child? Bc I think God has something to do with that.

Or, a woman can control her situation before or after having had sex, if you empower them to make that decsion, regardless of the status of the man. You know, using the intellect that god has given us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LOL at the PP saying that “people” shouldn’t be having sex if they aren’t 100% ready to have a child.

Come on, now. We all know you are referring to women. You think that WOMEN shouldn’t be having sex unless they are 100% ready to have a child. Because this reasoning will never deter men from having sex. Ever.

Well yeah the woman has the baby inside her and can only change that with medical intervention. A man - while he shouldn’t - can walk away and no one is the wiser. Might be unfair but it’s pragmstic that the person carrying the baby needs to carry greater responsibility bc there’s always a chance she’ll end up the solo parent. Is your problem that it’s unfair that the woman must carry the child? Bc I think God has something to do with that.

Honey God is irrelevant. This isn't Saudi Arabia - We have separation between church and state in America. Don't punish women for being born with the anatomy they have - that's between a woman and her doctor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These new laws all ignore contemporary society and what has changed since the 60s and Roe v Wade became law. Its laughable really. Don't have sex until you can support a child? LOL. I guess 80% of men better give up all hope of ever having sex they don't have to pay for then....

Actually nothing has changed. It is quite sad. Humans, ultimately, are mammals. Out instinct is to procreate at the base level. The difference is, we also have intellect and can manage these things as needed. It is only the moral imposition by certain people, the steep minority actually, who are imposing their construct on the rest of the country. It is purely tyranny of the minority. Combine this with the total hypocricy of people like Jerry Falwell, Jr and you have a recipe for undermining the moral majortiy (it is neither) movement for a generation. They are showing they are no better than the Taliban.

These religious extremists must be stopped from forcing their religion on millions of others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Alabama ranks 50th (DEAD LAST) in education. And we're supposed to believe this bill is really about the children, and not their hatred of women?

+1

These DBs don’t care about kids or women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^Disagreeing with you is ignorant and not allowed? Are you the internet police? No one ever told you that you can get pregnant every single time you have sex and yeah a partner can leave/hit you/whatever? That never occurred to you? And if your state had banned abortion, you really couldn’t have come up with $50 to get to another state? Maybe you shouldn’t have been doing it then.

$50? You are so stupid. Seriously, you’re embarrassing. But you’d fit in great in Alabama, they love stupid there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^Disagreeing with you is ignorant and not allowed? Are you the internet police? No one ever told you that you can get pregnant every single time you have sex and yeah a partner can leave/hit you/whatever? That never occurred to you? And if your state had banned abortion, you really couldn’t have come up with $50 to get to another state? Maybe you shouldn’t have been doing it then.

Can you show us how you're getting your $50 number, concerning traveling to another state? How are you getting that (insanely low) number?

Also what do you propose people do regarding the time it takes to go and travel to another state? Especially women working 2-3 jobs?

I get the feeling that you probably live in a very privileged bubble, and don't know how the real world, and real travel, and real time works for real people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LOL at the PP saying that “people” shouldn’t be having sex if they aren’t 100% ready to have a child.

Come on, now. We all know you are referring to women. You think that WOMEN shouldn’t be having sex unless they are 100% ready to have a child. Because this reasoning will never deter men from having sex. Ever.

Well yeah the woman has the baby inside her and can only change that with medical intervention. A man - while he shouldn’t - can walk away and no one is the wiser. Might be unfair but it’s pragmstic that the person carrying the baby needs to carry greater responsibility bc there’s always a chance she’ll end up the solo parent. Is your problem that it’s unfair that the woman must carry the child? Bc I think God has something to do with that.

Or, a woman can control her situation before or after having had sex, if you empower them to make that decsion, regardless of the status of the man. You know, using the intellect that god has given us.

Because you know birth control is always affordable and easy to get and works 100% of the time. Oh wait no it doesn't

[Anonymous]

This entire thread confirms that anti-choice is about punishing women for not conforming to rules about sex.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These new laws all ignore contemporary society and what has changed since the 60s and Roe v Wade became law. Its laughable really. Don't have sex until you can support a child? LOL. I guess 80% of men better give up all hope of ever having sex they don't have to pay for then....

Actually nothing has changed. It is quite sad. Humans, ultimately, are mammals. Out instinct is to procreate at the base level. The difference is, we also have intellect and can manage these things as needed. It is only the moral imposition by certain people, the steep minority actually, who are imposing their construct on the rest of the country. It is purely tyranny of the minority. Combine this with the total hypocricy of people like Jerry Falwell, Jr and you have a recipe for undermining the moral majortiy (it is neither) movement for a generation. They are showing they are no better than the Taliban.

More Incels I guess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This entire thread confirms that anti-choice is about punishing women for not conforming to rules about sex.

Absolutely it is!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This entire thread confirms that anti-choice is about punishing women for not conforming to rules about sex.

Absolutely it is!

x10000

Antiquated, misogynistic rules about sex.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This entire thread confirms that anti-choice is about punishing women for not conforming to rules about sex.

Absolutely it is!

x10000

Antiquated, misogynistic rules about sex.

About sex, about the role of women in the 21st century, about equality and society. the whole thing is medieval.

[Anonymous]

I can’t wait until the American Taliban in the south realizes that when a Nation can force a woman to bear a child against her will, it can also force a person to be sterilized against their will. That’s where we were 50 years ago.

Church attendance and religious membership is at an all time low. Scientists have found a link between being born again and having sustained brain damage. The earth is going to hell due to overpopulation, and yet certain groups breed like they expect every third child to die in infancy even though statistically none will. The writing is on the wall. It wouldn’t take much persuading to convince a cosmopolitan blue state that sterilizing the overbreeding religious fringe is in the best interests of the country. To quote the esteemed justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, “three generations of imbeciles is enough.”