Ohio heartbeat law

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Zygotes. Embryos. Inconvenient. Wrong timing. My right to choose to get rid of it.

No regrets? Same with Dylann Roof. He thought it was his right to express his anger the way he did. Beyond disgusting.

It is disgusting you would reduce 9 loved people who had families and friends and jobs and their own lives and dreams by equating them to fucking EMBRYOS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Zygotes. Embryos. Inconvenient. Wrong timing. My right to choose to get rid of it.

No regrets? Same with Dylann Roof. He thought it was his right to express his anger the way he did. Beyond disgusting.

It is disgusting you would reduce 9 loved people who had families and friends and jobs and their own lives and dreams by equating them to fucking EMBRYOS.

Your vitriol sounds almost violent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Zygotes. Embryos. Inconvenient. Wrong timing. My right to choose to get rid of it.

No regrets? Same with Dylann Roof. He thought it was his right to express his anger the way he did. Beyond disgusting.

It is disgusting you would reduce 9 loved people who had families and friends and jobs and their own lives and dreams by equating them to fucking EMBRYOS.

+1
This law is indefensible. Actually the entire anti choice movement is indefensible.

[Anonymous]

If a woman is already 20 or 22 weeks pregnant, she doesn't have that much longer to go all things considered.

For God's sake, abortions should not be allowed that late in the game.

The mother can hold on for another 10 or 18 weeks and then choose adoption.

I think what it really comes down to with abortion is - the mother just doesn't want to have a baby with the baby daddy.

I truly believe this. I think 99.99999% of women who are pregnant are happy to give birth and either raise the child or choose adoption.

But the problem for most of them who choose to abort is - they don't want to deal with baby daddy. They are disgusted with idea of him fighting for custody and/or them having to share custody forever with a guy they don't like anymore for whatever reason.

[Anonymous]

So, they selfishly choose to abort because they don't want to deal with the sperm donor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If a woman is already 20 or 22 weeks pregnant, she doesn't have that much longer to go all things considered.

For God's sake, abortions should not be allowed that late in the game.

The mother can hold on for another 10 or 18 weeks and then choose adoption.

I think what it really comes down to with abortion is - the mother just doesn't want to have a baby with the baby daddy.

I truly believe this. I think 99.99999% of women who are pregnant are happy to give birth and either raise the child or choose adoption.

But the problem for most of them who choose to abort is - they don't want to deal with baby daddy. They are disgusted with idea of him fighting for custody and/or them having to share custody forever with a guy they don't like anymore for whatever reason.

Um
No.

I could go on but no. You're wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If a woman is already 20 or 22 weeks pregnant, she doesn't have that much longer to go all things considered.

For God's sake, abortions should not be allowed that late in the game.

The mother can hold on for another 10 or 18 weeks and then choose adoption.

I think what it really comes down to with abortion is - the mother just doesn't want to have a baby with the baby daddy.

I truly believe this. I think 99.99999% of women who are pregnant are happy to give birth and either raise the child or choose adoption.

But the problem for most of them who choose to abort is - they don't want to deal with baby daddy. They are disgusted with idea of him fighting for custody and/or them having to share custody forever with a guy they don't like anymore for whatever reason.

Misogyny. And stupidity. Possibly gullibility. No one is having abortions that late because they changed their mind. Anti choicers refuse to see this.

And this thread is about an unconstitutional proposed law that seeks to ban abortion at 6 weeks, which if you've been pregnant you know is four weeks gestational age, or the week your period is late if your cycle is at least 28 days long and regular.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If a woman is already 20 or 22 weeks pregnant, she doesn't have that much longer to go all things considered.

For God's sake, abortions should not be allowed that late in the game.

The mother can hold on for another 10 or 18 weeks and then choose adoption.

You don't understand what happens when pre-eclampsia becomes eclampsia, do you?
https://rewire.news/article/2009/07/01/how-a-lateterm-abortion-saved-my-life/

Or when the twin of the already dead baby is also in the process of dying within the woman?
https://www.facebook.com/alyson.draper/posts/10209809201680871

Your inability to understand what you do not know is exactly why medical decisions must be left in the informed hands of medical providers. Not you, and not people like you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If a woman is already 20 or 22 weeks pregnant, she doesn't have that much longer to go all things considered.

For God's sake, abortions should not be allowed that late in the game.

The mother can hold on for another 10 or 18 weeks and then choose adoption.

You don't understand what happens when pre-eclampsia becomes eclampsia, do you?
https://rewire.news/article/2009/07/01/how-a-lateterm-abortion-saved-my-life/

Or when the twin of the already dead baby is also in the process of dying within the woman?
https://www.facebook.com/alyson.draper/posts/10209809201680871

Your inability to understand what you do not know is exactly why medical decisions must be left in the informed hands of medical providers. Not you, and not people like you.

Those are not typical abortion on demand reasons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If a woman is already 20 or 22 weeks pregnant, she doesn't have that much longer to go all things considered.

For God's sake, abortions should not be allowed that late in the game.

The mother can hold on for another 10 or 18 weeks and then choose adoption.

You don't understand what happens when pre-eclampsia becomes eclampsia, do you?
https://rewire.news/article/2009/07/01/how-a-lateterm-abortion-saved-my-life/

Or when the twin of the already dead baby is also in the process of dying within the woman?
https://www.facebook.com/alyson.draper/posts/10209809201680871

Your inability to understand what you do not know is exactly why medical decisions must be left in the informed hands of medical providers. Not you, and not people like you.

Those are not typical abortion on demand reasons.

Exactly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If a woman is already 20 or 22 weeks pregnant, she doesn't have that much longer to go all things considered.

For God's sake, abortions should not be allowed that late in the game.

The mother can hold on for another 10 or 18 weeks and then choose adoption.

You don't understand what happens when pre-eclampsia becomes eclampsia, do you?
https://rewire.news/article/2009/07/01/how-a-lateterm-abortion-saved-my-life/

Or when the twin of the already dead baby is also in the process of dying within the woman?
https://www.facebook.com/alyson.draper/posts/10209809201680871

Your inability to understand what you do not know is exactly why medical decisions must be left in the informed hands of medical providers. Not you, and not people like you.

Those are not typical abortion on demand reasons.

Actually, at the span of time you're talking about (20+ weeks) that's exactly why most women "demand" (and screw you for that word choice by the way) abortions. The vast majority of "elective" abortions take place between 6-12 weeks. When you're in 2nd, it's typically for medical reasons and in the 3rd it's ALWAYS for medical reasons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If a woman is already 20 or 22 weeks pregnant, she doesn't have that much longer to go all things considered.

For God's sake, abortions should not be allowed that late in the game.

The mother can hold on for another 10 or 18 weeks and then choose adoption.

I think what it really comes down to with abortion is - the mother just doesn't want to have a baby with the baby daddy.

I truly believe this. I think 99.99999% of women who are pregnant are happy to give birth and either raise the child or choose adoption.

But the problem for most of them who choose to abort is - they don't want to deal with baby daddy. They are disgusted with idea of him fighting for custody and/or them having to share custody forever with a guy they don't like anymore for whatever reason.

Misogyny. And stupidity. Possibly gullibility. No one is having abortions that late because they changed their mind. Anti choicers refuse to see this.

And this thread is about an unconstitutional proposed law that seeks to ban abortion at 6 weeks, which if you've been pregnant you know is four weeks gestational age, or the week your period is late if your cycle is at least 28 days long and regular.

It may be unconstitutional until the Supreme Court decides it is constitutional which may happen with a couple of conservative justices being appointed to the court.

Most likely, the courts will move towards abortion becoming an issue that the each state decides.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If a woman is already 20 or 22 weeks pregnant, she doesn't have that much longer to go all things considered.

For God's sake, abortions should not be allowed that late in the game.

The mother can hold on for another 10 or 18 weeks and then choose adoption.

You don't understand what happens when pre-eclampsia becomes eclampsia, do you?
https://rewire.news/article/2009/07/01/how-a-lateterm-abortion-saved-my-life/

Or when the twin of the already dead baby is also in the process of dying within the woman?
https://www.facebook.com/alyson.draper/posts/10209809201680871

Your inability to understand what you do not know is exactly why medical decisions must be left in the informed hands of medical providers. Not you, and not people like you.

Those are not typical abortion on demand reasons.

A. Medical reasons ARE the reasons for abortions at that gestational age. If you think that these are atypical reasons for abortions at 20 to 22 weeks, then you do not know what you are talking about. You care more about your ideology than you do the actual facts of the matter, which means you don't take it seriously at all. You should care more about it.

B. You -- or whomever you are supporting, who wrote the above -- did not say that "some" abortions should nto be allowed at the time. He or she said that they all should not be permitted, because it was only a matter of inconvenience. Again, you people should care more, if you think this is important. You're speaking about it like you get your information from bubble gum wrappers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If a woman is already 20 or 22 weeks pregnant, she doesn't have that much longer to go all things considered.

For God's sake, abortions should not be allowed that late in the game.

The mother can hold on for another 10 or 18 weeks and then choose adoption.

You don't understand what happens when pre-eclampsia becomes eclampsia, do you?
https://rewire.news/article/2009/07/01/how-a-lateterm-abortion-saved-my-life/

Or when the twin of the already dead baby is also in the process of dying within the woman?
https://www.facebook.com/alyson.draper/posts/10209809201680871

Your inability to understand what you do not know is exactly why medical decisions must be left in the informed hands of medical providers. Not you, and not people like you.

Those are not typical abortion on demand reasons.

A. Medical reasons ARE the reasons for abortions at that gestational age. If you think that these are atypical reasons for abortions at 20 to 22 weeks, then you do not know what you are talking about. You care more about your ideology than you do the actual facts of the matter, which means you don't take it seriously at all. You should care more about it.

B. You -- or whomever you are supporting, who wrote the above -- did not say that "some" abortions should nto be allowed at the time. He or she said that they all should not be permitted, because it was only a matter of inconvenience. Again, you people should care more, if you think this is important. You're speaking about it like you get your information from bubble gum wrappers.

Trust me,these low information idiots probably also believe doctors everywhere are routinely aborting 38 week gestational babies and then murdering them in the OR because "mom changed her mind." The ways people are uninformed about abortion but want to have strong opinions and make laws about it is sickening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If a woman is already 20 or 22 weeks pregnant, she doesn't have that much longer to go all things considered.

For God's sake, abortions should not be allowed that late in the game.

The mother can hold on for another 10 or 18 weeks and then choose adoption.

You don't understand what happens when pre-eclampsia becomes eclampsia, do you?
https://rewire.news/article/2009/07/01/how-a-lateterm-abortion-saved-my-life/

Or when the twin of the already dead baby is also in the process of dying within the woman?
https://www.facebook.com/alyson.draper/posts/10209809201680871

Your inability to understand what you do not know is exactly why medical decisions must be left in the informed hands of medical providers. Not you, and not people like you.

Those are not typical abortion on demand reasons.

Actually, at the span of time you're talking about (20+ weeks) that's exactly why most women "demand" (and screw you for that word choice by the way) abortions. The vast majority of "elective" abortions take place between 6-12 weeks. When you're in 2nd, it's typically for medical reasons and in the 3rd it's ALWAYS for medical reasons.

First of all, Nancy Pelosi uses the term "abortion on demand." Also, it's certainly anecdotal, but every woman I've known who had an abortion was either an unmarried teen or a married or single woman in her 20's - 30's who did not feel she could support another child at that time.