Women who say they aren't voting on the single issue of abortion rights

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand why liberals think that all women should want to be able or kill their own children. I think it’s because abortion is so abhorrent that they have to trick themselves into denial about what it really is.

I don't understand why conservatives think all 12 year olds should be made to deliver their rapists babies. I think it's because they can't stand the thought of females having control over their own bodies that they have to trick themselves into denial that a 12 year old is just as much a baby as a week old embryo.

Would you be ok banning abortions without defects, rape, risk to mother? Ban them from day 1 of pregnancy.

Define day 1 of pregnancy.

When the egg implants to the wall. So technically that’s day 3 or whatever. I guess I’m a progressive.

Well that's pretty retrograde in fact. Yikes. You sound controlling.

Do you realize well more than half of fertilized eggs never make it to a live baby? Because nature doesn't impart any sacredness to these early conceptions.

Well there would be no need for abortion in those cases, so what’s your point?

Why are YOU imparting sacredness to a 4 day old fertilized egg, valuing it over the life of the person who does not want it attached to her uterine wall?

It’s a life. Simple as that. Do women bear not responsibility to take simple steps to avoid getting pregnant if they don’t want to be pregnant?

You are assuming that all women who have sex gave consent. Have you ever been raped? I have. How is a woman obligated to prevent pregnancy when she did not even consent to have the sex in the first place? Do you know that Trump's abortion bans are taking away morning after emergency conception too? That even rape exceptions for abortion are difficult to administer because it's hard to prove you were raped when there were no witnesses, as is too often the case. Please have some empathy. I don't want more abortions that are unncessary. I simply want to preserve the right for health of mom, when fetus is not viable and carrying it to term would impede mom's health or future fertility, or when there wasn't consent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get it. Dems and some R's are advocating for choice, not abortion. Trumpers are advocating for no abortion at any cost, even if the fetus isn't viable for birth or mother's life could be compromised.

Advocating for choice isn't extreme. Forcing only one specific choice in all instances is.

Advocating to “choose” to murder someone who inconvenienced you is, in fact, extreme. People who do this are as bad as school shooters, or worse given that they are doing it to their own children.

Roe v. Wade talked about a right to privacy alongside viability of fetus and which trimester of pregnancy you were in. It's usually a religious view that life starts at conception. Other people consider life to start after a fetus takes on a certain degree of viability. Since reasonable people can disagree on when life starts, the courts under Roe decided to leave it up to individual people and their doctors and/or pastors/rabbis/imams to make this difficult determination. Under pro-choice laws, the government would never tell a pro-life person they must have an abortion, even if there's been incest or if the mother will die. That is your choice. Abortion is never pushed but doctors can discuss the implications of carrying a dangerous pregnancy to term for the mother. Under Trump's abortion bans, doctors can't even share the implications with the mother so she can make her choice. That choice is taken away. And under Trump's abortion bans, one view is imposed on everyone even though the majority of Americans have said they are pro-choice. Pro-choice allows flexibility; it doesn't force abortion.

There is no such thing as Trump abortion bans. It was pushed back to the states to decide.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I really find insane is that the same people that lecture others about systemic racism, “trans rights,” LGBT, climate change, and are sanctimonious and holier-than-though, many of those same people support the right to murder in cold blood babies at the 7th, 8th, 9th month of pregnancy. It’s a blood cult.

Very tiresome argument. From someone who probably would vote against free school lunches and free health and dental care for all children under 18. Yes, we know you would. Hypocrite.

Non responsive. My point is that many many people who lecture others about stupid social issue nonsense, those same people support the right to kill infants, defenseless babies, the most defenseless people in our society, at the viable stage of pregnancy. It’s really indefensible. I’m not saying this so you, as you at least support limits after visibility.

The vast majority of Americans including Democrats want to return to the standards of Roe which means abortion up to the point of viability and after that for threats to the mother's health, fetal abnormality, and rape (esp. in the case of children whose pregnancy might not be discovered until week 22 - still second trimester, by the way).

Ok let’s do it. But when republicans try restrictions like that they still get nuked by democrats and pro-choice extremists. And most women have bought the extreme position it seems.

Don't make us laugh. This WAS the standard across the country before anti-abortionists started reducing access to abortion and making all patients get vaginally wanded before an abortion, even minor children, forcing them to look at ultrasounds, forcing them to have a waiting period that many poor women couldn't afford. Republicans have been plotting the demise of abortion access for years and years. They are NOT interested in sticking with the Roe standard and you know it. We all know it. That is so incredibly disingenuous of you to state. Makes you sound like a troll.

Was it the standard in NY, CA, Mass?

Medical professionals could decide together with the patient.

You know damned well that abortion on demand for convenience was available in many blue states up into the last trimester.

Name the states and the clinics and tell us how much it costs to get a third trimester (week 27+) and how many women did it purely for sh!ts and giggles on a healthy fetus. Then I'll believe you that there was a crisis of women bored with pregnancy at week 38 who went and got an abortion just because. Thanks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I really find insane is that the same people that lecture others about systemic racism, “trans rights,” LGBT, climate change, and are sanctimonious and holier-than-though, many of those same people support the right to murder in cold blood babies at the 7th, 8th, 9th month of pregnancy. It’s a blood cult.

Very tiresome argument. From someone who probably would vote against free school lunches and free health and dental care for all children under 18. Yes, we know you would. Hypocrite.

Non responsive. My point is that many many people who lecture others about stupid social issue nonsense, those same people support the right to kill infants, defenseless babies, the most defenseless people in our society, at the viable stage of pregnancy. It’s really indefensible. I’m not saying this so you, as you at least support limits after visibility.

The vast majority of Americans including Democrats want to return to the standards of Roe which means abortion up to the point of viability and after that for threats to the mother's health, fetal abnormality, and rape (esp. in the case of children whose pregnancy might not be discovered until week 22 - still second trimester, by the way).

Ok let’s do it. But when republicans try restrictions like that they still get nuked by democrats and pro-choice extremists. And most women have bought the extreme position it seems.

Don't make us laugh. This WAS the standard across the country before anti-abortionists started reducing access to abortion and making all patients get vaginally wanded before an abortion, even minor children, forcing them to look at ultrasounds, forcing them to have a waiting period that many poor women couldn't afford. Republicans have been plotting the demise of abortion access for years and years. They are NOT interested in sticking with the Roe standard and you know it. We all know it. That is so incredibly disingenuous of you to state. Makes you sound like a troll.

Was it the standard in NY, CA, Mass?

Medical professionals could decide together with the patient.

You know damned well that abortion on demand for convenience was available in many blue states up into the last trimester.

Isn't lying like this amoral as well? You're a religious fanatical hypocrite, yeah?

They're are like 3 doctors in the US who even do this, it costs up to 25k, and they're are long lists for people in really tragic circumstances to get this kind of care. The books might allow for this in certain states but the reality is, 3rd trimester abortions for "convenience" are not a thing.

Something often stated but simply not true.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9321603/#:~:text=I%20find%20two%20pathways%20to,continue%3B%20and%20barriers%20to%20abortion%2C

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get it. Dems and some R's are advocating for choice, not abortion. Trumpers are advocating for no abortion at any cost, even if the fetus isn't viable for birth or mother's life could be compromised.

Advocating for choice isn't extreme. Forcing only one specific choice in all instances is.

Advocating to “choose” to murder someone who inconvenienced you is, in fact, extreme. People who do this are as bad as school shooters, or worse given that they are doing it to their own children.

Roe v. Wade talked about a right to privacy alongside viability of fetus and which trimester of pregnancy you were in. It's usually a religious view that life starts at conception. Other people consider life to start after a fetus takes on a certain degree of viability. Since reasonable people can disagree on when life starts, the courts under Roe decided to leave it up to individual people and their doctors and/or pastors/rabbis/imams to make this difficult determination. Under pro-choice laws, the government would never tell a pro-life person they must have an abortion, even if there's been incest or if the mother will die. That is your choice. Abortion is never pushed but doctors can discuss the implications of carrying a dangerous pregnancy to term for the mother. Under Trump's abortion bans, doctors can't even share the implications with the mother so she can make her choice. That choice is taken away. And under Trump's abortion bans, one view is imposed on everyone even though the majority of Americans have said they are pro-choice. Pro-choice allows flexibility; it doesn't force abortion.

There is no such thing as Trump abortion bans. It was pushed back to the states to decide.

Because he enabled it through his SCOTUS picks. He's very proud of that and has absolutely championed himself as the person who made it possible for states to ban abortion. Why are you denying him what he himself is happy about?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get it. Dems and some R's are advocating for choice, not abortion. Trumpers are advocating for no abortion at any cost, even if the fetus isn't viable for birth or mother's life could be compromised.

Advocating for choice isn't extreme. Forcing only one specific choice in all instances is.

Advocating to “choose” to murder someone who inconvenienced you is, in fact, extreme. People who do this are as bad as school shooters, or worse given that they are doing it to their own children.

Roe v. Wade talked about a right to privacy alongside viability of fetus and which trimester of pregnancy you were in. It's usually a religious view that life starts at conception. Other people consider life to start after a fetus takes on a certain degree of viability. Since reasonable people can disagree on when life starts, the courts under Roe decided to leave it up to individual people and their doctors and/or pastors/rabbis/imams to make this difficult determination. Under pro-choice laws, the government would never tell a pro-life person they must have an abortion, even if there's been incest or if the mother will die. That is your choice. Abortion is never pushed but doctors can discuss the implications of carrying a dangerous pregnancy to term for the mother. Under Trump's abortion bans, doctors can't even share the implications with the mother so she can make her choice. That choice is taken away. And under Trump's abortion bans, one view is imposed on everyone even though the majority of Americans have said they are pro-choice. Pro-choice allows flexibility; it doesn't force abortion.

There is no such thing as Trump abortion bans. It was pushed back to the states to decide.

So the backwards states implemented the Trump-enabled and approved abortion ban?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I really find insane is that the same people that lecture others about systemic racism, “trans rights,” LGBT, climate change, and are sanctimonious and holier-than-though, many of those same people support the right to murder in cold blood babies at the 7th, 8th, 9th month of pregnancy. It’s a blood cult.

Very tiresome argument. From someone who probably would vote against free school lunches and free health and dental care for all children under 18. Yes, we know you would. Hypocrite.

Non responsive. My point is that many many people who lecture others about stupid social issue nonsense, those same people support the right to kill infants, defenseless babies, the most defenseless people in our society, at the viable stage of pregnancy. It’s really indefensible. I’m not saying this so you, as you at least support limits after visibility.

The vast majority of Americans including Democrats want to return to the standards of Roe which means abortion up to the point of viability and after that for threats to the mother's health, fetal abnormality, and rape (esp. in the case of children whose pregnancy might not be discovered until week 22 - still second trimester, by the way).

Ok let’s do it. But when republicans try restrictions like that they still get nuked by democrats and pro-choice extremists. And most women have bought the extreme position it seems.

Don't make us laugh. This WAS the standard across the country before anti-abortionists started reducing access to abortion and making all patients get vaginally wanded before an abortion, even minor children, forcing them to look at ultrasounds, forcing them to have a waiting period that many poor women couldn't afford. Republicans have been plotting the demise of abortion access for years and years. They are NOT interested in sticking with the Roe standard and you know it. We all know it. That is so incredibly disingenuous of you to state. Makes you sound like a troll.

Was it the standard in NY, CA, Mass?

Medical professionals could decide together with the patient.

You know damned well that abortion on demand for convenience was available in many blue states up into the last trimester.

Isn't lying like this amoral as well? You're a religious fanatical hypocrite, yeah?

They're are like 3 doctors in the US who even do this, it costs up to 25k, and they're are long lists for people in really tragic circumstances to get this kind of care. The books might allow for this in certain states but the reality is, 3rd trimester abortions for "convenience" are not a thing.

Something often stated but simply not true.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9321603/#:~:text=I%20find%20two%20pathways%20to,continue%3B%20and%20barriers%20to%20abortion%2C

From your article:

wherein the respondent was in the third trimester by the time she was able to surmount the obstacles to abortion she faced, including cost, finding a provider, and stigmatization.

So what this is indicating is that if these women had earlier access to abortion, they wouldn't have had a third trimester abortion. Sounds like that's on conservatives. Sounds about right - cons are driving the third trimester abortions on healthy fetuses by putting up too many obstacles for women who would want one much earlier in their pregnancy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Once again forced birthers end up looking like a bag of clowns, all accusations and their own weird Life News takes on what they think pro choice people want, and the flimsiest understanding of any of the issues. Like weird little bits of slag formed in the weak fires of right wing propaganda, they’re off their rockers.

I’m pro-choice but I think in this thread, the extremist death up until birth people look by far the worst.

Timestamp of the poster who said “up until birth”?

The PP who compared the fetus to a liver removal.

[Anonymous]

Here’s NPR on another example

That was true for Beth Vial, a college student from Portland, Ore., who didn't learn she was pregnant until she was about 26 weeks along, in the summer of 2017. "I just [burst] out crying. I didn't believe them because I was told that wasn't a possibility for me," she said.

…Doctors in Portland told her she was too far along for an abortion there.

..,

"I was already having a tough time in my life in a lot of other ways and it just felt like one more thing I really couldn't bear, or provide for, and I was panicked, I guess," Vial said.

Vial found a clinic in New Mexico that told her they would end her pregnancy up until 28 weeks — the beginning of the third trimester.

She scrambled, with the help of family, friends and a nonprofit that helps women pay for abortions, to pull together the fee of more than $10,000.

"[There were] a lot of people telling me how they felt about my situation without me asking — friends, family, strangers," Vial said. "I mean, you tell someone that you're seven months pregnant and having an abortion, they've got some things to say."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get it. Dems and some R's are advocating for choice, not abortion. Trumpers are advocating for no abortion at any cost, even if the fetus isn't viable for birth or mother's life could be compromised.

Advocating for choice isn't extreme. Forcing only one specific choice in all instances is.

Advocating to “choose” to murder someone who inconvenienced you is, in fact, extreme. People who do this are as bad as school shooters, or worse given that they are doing it to their own children.

Roe v. Wade talked about a right to privacy alongside viability of fetus and which trimester of pregnancy you were in. It's usually a religious view that life starts at conception. Other people consider life to start after a fetus takes on a certain degree of viability. Since reasonable people can disagree on when life starts, the courts under Roe decided to leave it up to individual people and their doctors and/or pastors/rabbis/imams to make this difficult determination. Under pro-choice laws, the government would never tell a pro-life person they must have an abortion, even if there's been incest or if the mother will die. That is your choice. Abortion is never pushed but doctors can discuss the implications of carrying a dangerous pregnancy to term for the mother. Under Trump's abortion bans, doctors can't even share the implications with the mother so she can make her choice. That choice is taken away. And under Trump's abortion bans, one view is imposed on everyone even though the majority of Americans have said they are pro-choice. Pro-choice allows flexibility; it doesn't force abortion.

There is no such thing as Trump abortion bans. It was pushed back to the states to decide.

Yawn. Give up on that tiresome bla bla bla. They are Trump abortion bans in everyone's mind but yours.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here’s NPR on another example

That was true for Beth Vial, a college student from Portland, Ore., who didn't learn she was pregnant until she was about 26 weeks along, in the summer of 2017. "I just [burst] out crying. I didn't believe them because I was told that wasn't a possibility for me," she said.

…Doctors in Portland told her she was too far along for an abortion there.

..,

"I was already having a tough time in my life in a lot of other ways and it just felt like one more thing I really couldn't bear, or provide for, and I was panicked, I guess," Vial said.

Vial found a clinic in New Mexico that told her they would end her pregnancy up until 28 weeks — the beginning of the third trimester.

She scrambled, with the help of family, friends and a nonprofit that helps women pay for abortions, to pull together the fee of more than $10,000.

"[There were] a lot of people telling me how they felt about my situation without me asking — friends, family, strangers," Vial said. "I mean, you tell someone that you're seven months pregnant and having an abortion, they've got some things to say."

God, that is so horrifying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I really find insane is that the same people that lecture others about systemic racism, “trans rights,” LGBT, climate change, and are sanctimonious and holier-than-though, many of those same people support the right to murder in cold blood babies at the 7th, 8th, 9th month of pregnancy. It’s a blood cult.

Very tiresome argument. From someone who probably would vote against free school lunches and free health and dental care for all children under 18. Yes, we know you would. Hypocrite.

Non responsive. My point is that many many people who lecture others about stupid social issue nonsense, those same people support the right to kill infants, defenseless babies, the most defenseless people in our society, at the viable stage of pregnancy. It’s really indefensible. I’m not saying this so you, as you at least support limits after visibility.

The vast majority of Americans including Democrats want to return to the standards of Roe which means abortion up to the point of viability and after that for threats to the mother's health, fetal abnormality, and rape (esp. in the case of children whose pregnancy might not be discovered until week 22 - still second trimester, by the way).

Ok let’s do it. But when republicans try restrictions like that they still get nuked by democrats and pro-choice extremists. And most women have bought the extreme position it seems.

Don't make us laugh. This WAS the standard across the country before anti-abortionists started reducing access to abortion and making all patients get vaginally wanded before an abortion, even minor children, forcing them to look at ultrasounds, forcing them to have a waiting period that many poor women couldn't afford. Republicans have been plotting the demise of abortion access for years and years. They are NOT interested in sticking with the Roe standard and you know it. We all know it. That is so incredibly disingenuous of you to state. Makes you sound like a troll.

Was it the standard in NY, CA, Mass?

Medical professionals could decide together with the patient.

You know damned well that abortion on demand for convenience was available in many blue states up into the last trimester.

Isn't lying like this amoral as well? You're a religious fanatical hypocrite, yeah?

They're are like 3 doctors in the US who even do this, it costs up to 25k, and they're are long lists for people in really tragic circumstances to get this kind of care. The books might allow for this in certain states but the reality is, 3rd trimester abortions for "convenience" are not a thing.

Something often stated but simply not true.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9321603/#:~:text=I%20find%20two%20pathways%20to,continue%3B%20and%20barriers%20to%20abortion%2C

From your article:

wherein the respondent was in the third trimester by the time she was able to surmount the obstacles to abortion she faced, including cost, finding a provider, and stigmatization.

So what this is indicating is that if these women had earlier access to abortion, they wouldn't have had a third trimester abortion. Sounds like that's on conservatives. Sounds about right - cons are driving the third trimester abortions on healthy fetuses by putting up too many obstacles for women who would want one much earlier in their pregnancy.

It disproves the idea that third trimester abortions are solely for fetal abnormalities and “tragic circumstances” and previously claimed. No, they simply are not, and the published literature has been clear on this for over a decade. You’re changing the subject to deflect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I really find insane is that the same people that lecture others about systemic racism, “trans rights,” LGBT, climate change, and are sanctimonious and holier-than-though, many of those same people support the right to murder in cold blood babies at the 7th, 8th, 9th month of pregnancy. It’s a blood cult.

Very tiresome argument. From someone who probably would vote against free school lunches and free health and dental care for all children under 18. Yes, we know you would. Hypocrite.

Non responsive. My point is that many many people who lecture others about stupid social issue nonsense, those same people support the right to kill infants, defenseless babies, the most defenseless people in our society, at the viable stage of pregnancy. It’s really indefensible. I’m not saying this so you, as you at least support limits after visibility.

The vast majority of Americans including Democrats want to return to the standards of Roe which means abortion up to the point of viability and after that for threats to the mother's health, fetal abnormality, and rape (esp. in the case of children whose pregnancy might not be discovered until week 22 - still second trimester, by the way).

Ok let’s do it. But when republicans try restrictions like that they still get nuked by democrats and pro-choice extremists. And most women have bought the extreme position it seems.

Don't make us laugh. This WAS the standard across the country before anti-abortionists started reducing access to abortion and making all patients get vaginally wanded before an abortion, even minor children, forcing them to look at ultrasounds, forcing them to have a waiting period that many poor women couldn't afford. Republicans have been plotting the demise of abortion access for years and years. They are NOT interested in sticking with the Roe standard and you know it. We all know it. That is so incredibly disingenuous of you to state. Makes you sound like a troll.

Was it the standard in NY, CA, Mass?

Medical professionals could decide together with the patient.

You know damned well that abortion on demand for convenience was available in many blue states up into the last trimester.

Isn't lying like this amoral as well? You're a religious fanatical hypocrite, yeah?

They're are like 3 doctors in the US who even do this, it costs up to 25k, and they're are long lists for people in really tragic circumstances to get this kind of care. The books might allow for this in certain states but the reality is, 3rd trimester abortions for "convenience" are not a thing.

Something often stated but simply not true.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9321603/#:~:text=I%20find%20two%20pathways%20to,continue%3B%20and%20barriers%20to%20abortion%2C

From your article:

wherein the respondent was in the third trimester by the time she was able to surmount the obstacles to abortion she faced, including cost, finding a provider, and stigmatization.

So what this is indicating is that if these women had earlier access to abortion, they wouldn't have had a third trimester abortion. Sounds like that's on conservatives. Sounds about right - cons are driving the third trimester abortions on healthy fetuses by putting up too many obstacles for women who would want one much earlier in their pregnancy.

It disproves the idea that third trimester abortions are solely for fetal abnormalities and “tragic circumstances” and previously claimed. No, they simply are not, and the published literature has been clear on this for over a decade. You’re changing the subject to deflect.

Again - take responsibility. Would these abortions have happened so late if conservatives hadn’t put up so many barriers for women seeking abortions? No. They would not have.

We know this is one of the things anti-abortionists want. They want to prevent women from getting abortions early on and then they say oops, too late. That is your modus operandi. So yes I blame such abortions on anti-abortionists.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get it. Dems and some R's are advocating for choice, not abortion. Trumpers are advocating for no abortion at any cost, even if the fetus isn't viable for birth or mother's life could be compromised.

Advocating for choice isn't extreme. Forcing only one specific choice in all instances is.

Advocating to “choose” to murder someone who inconvenienced you is, in fact, extreme. People who do this are as bad as school shooters, or worse given that they are doing it to their own children.

Roe v. Wade talked about a right to privacy alongside viability of fetus and which trimester of pregnancy you were in. It's usually a religious view that life starts at conception. Other people consider life to start after a fetus takes on a certain degree of viability. Since reasonable people can disagree on when life starts, the courts under Roe decided to leave it up to individual people and their doctors and/or pastors/rabbis/imams to make this difficult determination. Under pro-choice laws, the government would never tell a pro-life person they must have an abortion, even if there's been incest or if the mother will die. That is your choice. Abortion is never pushed but doctors can discuss the implications of carrying a dangerous pregnancy to term for the mother. Under Trump's abortion bans, doctors can't even share the implications with the mother so she can make her choice. That choice is taken away. And under Trump's abortion bans, one view is imposed on everyone even though the majority of Americans have said they are pro-choice. Pro-choice allows flexibility; it doesn't force abortion.

Trump's abortion ban? Say what now? Trump is not president, he has not banned anything. What kind of leap are you making here?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get it. Dems and some R's are advocating for choice, not abortion. Trumpers are advocating for no abortion at any cost, even if the fetus isn't viable for birth or mother's life could be compromised.

Advocating for choice isn't extreme. Forcing only one specific choice in all instances is.

Advocating to “choose” to murder someone who inconvenienced you is, in fact, extreme. People who do this are as bad as school shooters, or worse given that they are doing it to their own children.

Roe v. Wade talked about a right to privacy alongside viability of fetus and which trimester of pregnancy you were in. It's usually a religious view that life starts at conception. Other people consider life to start after a fetus takes on a certain degree of viability. Since reasonable people can disagree on when life starts, the courts under Roe decided to leave it up to individual people and their doctors and/or pastors/rabbis/imams to make this difficult determination. Under pro-choice laws, the government would never tell a pro-life person they must have an abortion, even if there's been incest or if the mother will die. That is your choice. Abortion is never pushed but doctors can discuss the implications of carrying a dangerous pregnancy to term for the mother. Under Trump's abortion bans, doctors can't even share the implications with the mother so she can make her choice. That choice is taken away. And under Trump's abortion bans, one view is imposed on everyone even though the majority of Americans have said they are pro-choice. Pro-choice allows flexibility; it doesn't force abortion.

Trump's abortion ban? Say what now? Trump is not president, he has not banned anything. What kind of leap are you making here?

Trump is going to have consequences for overturning Roe. Just understand that.