Official Abortion Thread

[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.

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.

Don't worry, these clever legislators have thought of everything - in some of these laws, if you travel to another state to have an abortion, you STILL can be prosecuted.

So does that mean if I drive legally at 70 MPH in Pennsylvania, I can be arrested for speeding after the fact in Alabama?

[Anonymous]

I think most Americans agree with the following:

Safe and legal abortion through the first trimester.
Safe and legal abortion in the third trimester if the health of the mother or the viability of the baby are at risk.

Why not just pass legislation that codifies this; keep the Hyde Amendment in place to satisfy the religious right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t support the ban, but reading #youknowme —maybe people ought to consider having less sex with strangers? For every one person on there saying it was rape or a fetus with medical issues, there’s 50 saying — well I barely knew the guy . . . Uh maybe then he keeps it in his pants and you keep your underwear on?!

What makes you think abortions are the product of sex with strangers? 45% of the women having abortions are married or living with a partner.
https://www.guttmacher.org/fact-sheet/induced-abortion-united-states

They’re fine marrying him or living with him and sleeping with him until there’s a baby and then it’s — oh I don’t want a kid with him. Read the hashtag — it really isn’t about medical problems or rape for the majority talking about it. Is it no longer taught that you can pregnant EVERY time you have sex no matter how many BC methods you’re using, so if you don’t want a baby or child support, don’t do it?!

I’m sorry, are you trying to imply that the HASHTAG YOU’RE READING has better information about who the women are who get abortions and why they get them than The Guttmacher Institute?

Don’t know who Guttmacher is but it’s in line with what I’m reading. Sex is all well and good until it’s — ew I don’t want a baby with HIM?!

Shut your ignorant mouth.

The Guttmacher Institute is the foremost authority on research into the topics of women’s health and reproductive rights.
https://www.guttmacher.org

25 years ago I had an accidental pregnancy, while on the pill, with someone I had been dating for more than a year. When I told him I was pregnant was the first time he punched me in the face - because I was ruining his future.

So no, I didn’t want to have a baby with him.

I wonder how many women will be killed because of this new ban? The stat now is that more than half of all women murdered are killed by a spouse or romantic partner. And now this is one more reason - the man doesn’t want to be burdened with a baby, so he kills the pregnant mom.

This is a fair point. Women don’t want to bring a baby into a domestic violence situation. They risk that either the father won’t want the kid and will lose it and hurt them. But, they also (and maybe more often) have abortions because they are scared that dad will be delighted, because it keep the woman from ever leaving and having to share custody/ send an innocent child for visitation unprotected.

How many women raise kids in households with domestic violence because they can’t leave a kid unprotected? At the beginning of my legal career I got restraining orders for women in domestic violence situations. I have friends in domestic violence. Once the “he will change” wears off, the top reason they don’t leave is dad holding the kids over them.

If we force women to have babies and be Solely responsible for caring for babies, we also need to go back to assuming Mom has sole physical custody if she wants it. If you force mom to have sole physical custody of a fetus, she should have the choice to have sole physical custody of the child.

You know, like they did back during MAGA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think most Americans agree with the following:

Safe and legal abortion through the first trimester.
Safe and legal abortion in the third trimester if the health of the mother or the viability of the baby are at risk.

Why not just pass legislation that codifies this; keep the Hyde Amendment in place to satisfy the religious right.

You don’t want legislation. It is subject to being changed as party control changes. See also— the ACA. You want a Court right or a constitutional amendment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think most Americans agree with the following:

Safe and legal abortion through the first trimester.
Safe and legal abortion in the third trimester if the health of the mother or the viability of the baby are at risk.

Why not just pass legislation that codifies this; keep the Hyde Amendment in place to satisfy the religious right.

Because the “religious right” will not be satisfied until they can tell you when, where and how to have kids. How to raise those kids. Who to love and marry. Etc.

They aren’t satisfied controlling their lives. The American Taliban— which is a distinct minority in this country— feels the need to control every aspect of yours too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

Don't worry, these clever legislators have thought of everything - in some of these laws, if you travel to another state to have an abortion, you STILL can be prosecuted.

So does that mean if I drive legally at 70 MPH in Pennsylvania, I can be arrested for speeding after the fact in Alabama?

No, because that would affect too many men. Only abortion refugees seeking medical assistance in other states would be arrested and jailed because of this unconstitutional law. It’s like we’re living in the prequel to a dystopian futuristic novel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Religion has no place in this argument, separation of church and state. I am an atheist, I equate your god with Santa Claus. I do not require you to live by my morals and I should not have to live by yours. I do not believe that a bunch of cells is more important than my life and my goals for my life. Why don't we worry about all of the children in the foster care system, all of the children being raised in poverty and the children being detained at the border before there is any concern about abortion. Let's show more concern about the children and mothers that are already here.

And if I don't have complete sovereignty over my body, I have no freedom at all. My body, my choice!!!!

It's obviously not that simple. None of us have complete sovereignty over our bodies: we can't take certain drugs without prescriptions, for example.

Moreover, and more importantly for this discussion, we can't use our bodies to physically harm another person. My right to swing my fist ends where your nose begins.

The whole debate comes down to whether and to what extent a fetus should be considered a "person" vs. a bundle of cells no different (legally) than a fingernail or an appendix.

It's not an easy question and I think that those who pretend otherwise (on both sides of the debate) do a disservice to us all.

The fetus is internal, in my body. Hitting someone, taking a drug, involve things that are external. If I don't have control over what is literally inside my body, I have no control and therefore no freedom. And it's not an easy question and therefore should be the woman's decision. This is an area where one answer will never fit all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think most Americans agree with the following:

Safe and legal abortion through the first trimester.
Safe and legal abortion in the third trimester if the health of the mother or the viability of the baby are at risk.

Why not just pass legislation that codifies this; keep the Hyde Amendment in place to satisfy the religious right.

Because the “religious right” will not be satisfied until they can tell you when, where and how to have kids. How to raise those kids. Who to love and marry. Etc.

They aren’t satisfied controlling their lives. The American Taliban— which is a distinct minority in this country— feels the need to control every aspect of yours too.

If it is legislation that is affirmed by a court, then it becomes the law of the land and the religious right can move to Kabul.

[Anonymous]

After having a baby, I feel as if the baby is so wonderful, I could never live without him or her.

It’s hard for humans to love someone they’ve never seen- but that’s what you are killing when you abort.

A child you feel as if you’d die without or if something happened to, once you see him or her.

The opposite of love is indifference. The indifference in the pro-choice community to the death of a baby is pure evil.

Hopefully Roe v Wade is overturned. It would be so nice to live in a society that values the lives of innocent babies.

The same women valued as a unborn baby and their life given respect can learn to do so for their babies.

Our disposable, de-humanizing culture can be checked, slightly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think most Americans agree with the following:

Safe and legal abortion through the first trimester.
Safe and legal abortion in the third trimester if the health of the mother or the viability of the baby are at risk.

Why not just pass legislation that codifies this; keep the Hyde Amendment in place to satisfy the religious right.

Because the “religious right” will not be satisfied until they can tell you when, where and how to have kids. How to raise those kids. Who to love and marry. Etc.

They aren’t satisfied controlling their lives. The American Taliban— which is a distinct minority in this country— feels the need to control every aspect of yours too.

If it is legislation that is affirmed by a court, then it becomes the law of the land and the religious right can move to Kabul.

No, we are going to overturn Roe v Wade.

After your tantrum, you’ll learn how to pay for and use bc. You’ll survive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
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.



Religion has no place in this argument, separation of church and state. I am an atheist, I equate your god with Santa Claus. I do not require you to live by my morals and I should not have to live by yours. I do not believe that a bunch of cells is more important than my life and my goals for my life. Why don't we worry about all of the children in the foster care system, all of the children being raised in poverty and the children being detained at the border before there is any concern about abortion. Let's show more concern about the children and mothers that are already here.

And if I don't have complete sovereignty over my body, I have no freedom at all. My body, my choice!!!!


It's obviously not that simple. None of us have complete sovereignty over our bodies: we can't take certain drugs without prescriptions, for example.

Moreover, and more importantly for this discussion, we can't use our bodies to physically harm another person. My right to swing my fist ends where your nose begins.

The whole debate comes down to whether and to what extent a fetus should be considered a "person" vs. a bundle of cells no different (legally) than a fingernail or an appendix.

It's not an easy question and I think that those who pretend otherwise (on both sides of the debate) do a disservice to us all.


But it IS an easy question. It’s as easy as answering whether a parent should be required by the State to donate their blood/organs to their child if it would save their life. Pretending that it is complicated and difficult is why we are in this position. The State can either force you to sacrifice your body to save another or it can’t.


I understand that it's easy for you (and, ironically, for those who disagree with you), but for me it's a very, very difficult question indeed. I'd suggest that the level of disagreement about this issue is an indicator of it's complexity.

Your example is interesting, and one I've not heard before. FWIW, I'd think that a parent SHOULD be required to donate blood to save a child's life. But an organ or anything life-threatening to parent? I'm not sure.

I'm pretty sure and I'm a parent. I'm pretty sure I don't want the government deciding whether or not I have to give my life for my child's life and donate that organ. There's a reason you put on your own oxygen mask first on the airplane before helping your child. Maybe the government should change the airline regs on that?

Fair enough. But you didn't address the other example: should a parent be required to donate blood to save a child's life?

That's an easy "yes" for me. What about you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The opposite of love is indifference. The indifference in the pro-choice community to the death of a baby is pure evil.

Hopefully Roe v Wade is overturned. It would be so nice to live in a society that values the lives of innocent babies.

I hope, as you value life so much, that you vote for candidates who support universal health care, subsidized housing, low interest college loans, child care assistance, WIC, food stamps, and access to low cost contraception. Because once the babies are born, they often need more than their parents can provide.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think most Americans agree with the following:

Safe and legal abortion through the first trimester.
Safe and legal abortion in the third trimester if the health of the mother or the viability of the baby are at risk.

Why not just pass legislation that codifies this; keep the Hyde Amendment in place to satisfy the religious right.

Because the “religious right” will not be satisfied until they can tell you when, where and how to have kids. How to raise those kids. Who to love and marry. Etc.

They aren’t satisfied controlling their lives. The American Taliban— which is a distinct minority in this country— feels the need to control every aspect of yours too.

If it is legislation that is affirmed by a court, then it becomes the law of the land and the religious right can move to Kabul.

No, we are going to overturn Roe v Wade.

After your tantrum, you’ll learn how to pay for and use bc. You’ll survive.

All birth control has failure rates. They’re all listed earlier in the thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:After having a baby, I feel as if the baby is so wonderful, I could never live without him or her.

It’s hard for humans to love someone they’ve never seen- but that’s what you are killing when you abort.

A child you feel as if you’d die without or if something happened to, once you see him or her.

The opposite of love is indifference. The indifference in the pro-choice community to the death of a baby is pure evil.

Hopefully Roe v Wade is overturned. It would be so nice to live in a society that values the lives of innocent babies.

The same women valued as a unborn baby and their life given respect can learn to do so for their babies.

Our disposable, de-humanizing culture can be checked, slightly.

And great for your baby. But not all women who give birth feel like you. And even if they do, not all women are in circumstances where they can raise a child. Or where the child will be well taken care of. It takes a lot of time, and money and care to give a child a good start at life. And many women don’t want to or can’t. Something like half of women who have abortions are already mothers. So they know the new mommy glow. Still doesn’t mean they can raise the 4th kid in poverty.

Your privilege is showing.

[Anonymous]

Missouri passes "one of the strongest" abortion bills yet in U.S.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/missouri-abortion-law-senate-passes-wide-ranging-bill-to-ban-abortions-at-eight-weeks-of-pregnancy/

Missouri's Republican-led Senate has passed a wide-ranging bill to ban abortions at eight weeks of pregnancy, acting only hours after Alabama's governor signed a near-total abortion ban into law. The Missouri bill needs another vote of approval in the GOP-led House before it can go to Republican Gov. Mike Parson, who voiced support for an earlier version Wednesday.
It includes exceptions for medical emergencies, but not for pregnancies caused by rape or incest. Doctors would face five to 15 years in prison for violating the eight-week cutoff. Women who receive abortions wouldn't be prosecuted.

Missouri joins a movement of GOP-dominated state legislatures emboldened by the possibility that a more conservative Supreme Court could overturn its landmark ruling legalizing the procedure.