10 year old girl has to travel out of state to get abortio

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/catherine-glenn-foster-abortion-eric-swalwell-b2123411.html

The president of an anti-abortion legal advocacy group told a House committee this week that abortion care for a 10-year-old girl would not be considered an abortion.

If this doesn't prove that forced birthers are about punishing women for having sex, I don't know what is.

-former religious "pro-life" person who knows it's about punishing women for having sex.

Forced birthers are stuck, now. Theyve been saying no abortions because the fetus and embryo are people with equal rights to life.

But they know they can’t deny a raped 10 year old an abortion. That is politically unpalatable.

So they have to say if the pregnancy will affect the health of the mother, ending it isn’t an abortion. It is justified, therefore it is not an abortion. Because abortions are only when you end a pregnancy for no good reason.

This line of reasoning will not, however, get them where they think it will get them… but they aren’t smart enough to see the flaws in this argument.

Like most conservatives, they are crap on the details of governing, and legislation.

This is incorrect. Conservatives are pretty good at governing. The problem is when loons drive out actual conservatives. There aren't that many actual conservatives left around.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/catherine-glenn-foster-abortion-eric-swalwell-b2123411.html

The president of an anti-abortion legal advocacy group told a House committee this week that abortion care for a 10-year-old girl would not be considered an abortion.

If this doesn't prove that forced birthers are about punishing women for having sex, I don't know what is.

-former religious "pro-life" person who knows it's about punishing women for having sex.

Forced birthers are stuck, now. Theyve been saying no abortions because the fetus and embryo are people with equal rights to life.

But they know they can’t deny a raped 10 year old an abortion. That is politically unpalatable.

So they have to say if the pregnancy will affect the health of the mother, ending it isn’t an abortion. It is justified, therefore it is not an abortion. Because abortions are only when you end a pregnancy for no good reason.

This line of reasoning will not, however, get them where they think it will get them… but they aren’t smart enough to see the flaws in this argument.

Like most conservatives, they are crap on the details of governing, and legislation.

If Republicans truly believe that life begins at the instant of conception, how can they also argue that a child conceived via rape is worth less than a child conceived via consensual sex (which they are now doing apparently)?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/catherine-glenn-foster-abortion-eric-swalwell-b2123411.html

The president of an anti-abortion legal advocacy group told a House committee this week that abortion care for a 10-year-old girl would not be considered an abortion.

If this doesn't prove that forced birthers are about punishing women for having sex, I don't know what is.

-former religious "pro-life" person who knows it's about punishing women for having sex.

Forced birthers are stuck, now. Theyve been saying no abortions because the fetus and embryo are people with equal rights to life.

But they know they can’t deny a raped 10 year old an abortion. That is politically unpalatable.

So they have to say if the pregnancy will affect the health of the mother, ending it isn’t an abortion. It is justified, therefore it is not an abortion. Because abortions are only when you end a pregnancy for no good reason.

This line of reasoning will not, however, get them where they think it will get them… but they aren’t smart enough to see the flaws in this argument.

Like most conservatives, they are crap on the details of governing, and legislation.

This is incorrect. Conservatives are pretty good at governing. The problem is when loons drive out actual conservatives. There aren't that many actual conservatives left around.

“Conservatives” want to destroy government except when it serves the goal of owning the libs. They have sucked at governing since Reagan. Cutting taxes to cut government programs — but not the military — and endless wars isn’t “good at governing.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/catherine-glenn-foster-abortion-eric-swalwell-b2123411.html

The president of an anti-abortion legal advocacy group told a House committee this week that abortion care for a 10-year-old girl would not be considered an abortion.

If this doesn't prove that forced birthers are about punishing women for having sex, I don't know what is.

-former religious "pro-life" person who knows it's about punishing women for having sex.

Forced birthers are stuck, now. Theyve been saying no abortions because the fetus and embryo are people with equal rights to life.

But they know they can’t deny a raped 10 year old an abortion. That is politically unpalatable.

So they have to say if the pregnancy will affect the health of the mother, ending it isn’t an abortion. It is justified, therefore it is not an abortion. Because abortions are only when you end a pregnancy for no good reason.

This line of reasoning will not, however, get them where they think it will get them… but they aren’t smart enough to see the flaws in this argument.

Like most conservatives, they are crap on the details of governing, and legislation.

This is incorrect. Conservatives are pretty good at governing. The problem is when loons drive out actual conservatives. There aren't that many actual conservatives left around.

“Conservatives” want to destroy government except when it serves the goal of owning the libs. They have sucked at governing since Reagan. Cutting taxes to cut government programs — but not the military — and endless wars isn’t “good at governing.”

There are 50 states, many of them have local or state governments that are governed by conservatives. The world is larger than Congress.

FYI, owning the libs is a loon goal, not a conservative one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thank goodness Republicans are going after the REAL criminal here - the Indiana doctor who shared the child's story

Wait abortion records are public documents in Indiana????? So anyone who terminated would be public knowledge?

WTAF?

This is not surprising or anything to freak out about. The vast majority of states collect and report abortion data and have for decades. Only a handful don’t. As things are currently doesn’t mean that the individual who terminated is identified (I wouldn’t be surprised if that changes in the coming years, of course, the way things are going.) What is typically reported is the facility, patient demographics like age and marital status, gestational age, and the procedure used. This is where we get abortion statistics from.

He is trying to pull identifying data from the reports.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/catherine-glenn-foster-abortion-eric-swalwell-b2123411.html

The president of an anti-abortion legal advocacy group told a House committee this week that abortion care for a 10-year-old girl would not be considered an abortion.

If this doesn't prove that forced birthers are about punishing women for having sex, I don't know what is.

-former religious "pro-life" person who knows it's about punishing women for having sex.

Forced birthers are stuck, now. Theyve been saying no abortions because the fetus and embryo are people with equal rights to life.

But they know they can’t deny a raped 10 year old an abortion. That is politically unpalatable.

So they have to say if the pregnancy will affect the health of the mother, ending it isn’t an abortion. It is justified, therefore it is not an abortion. Because abortions are only when you end a pregnancy for no good reason.

This line of reasoning will not, however, get them where they think it will get them… but they aren’t smart enough to see the flaws in this argument.

Like most conservatives, they are crap on the details of governing, and legislation.

This is incorrect. Conservatives are pretty good at governing. The problem is when loons drive out actual conservatives. There aren't that many actual conservatives left around.

“Conservatives” want to destroy government except when it serves the goal of owning the libs. They have sucked at governing since Reagan. Cutting taxes to cut government programs — but not the military — and endless wars isn’t “good at governing.”

+1

Conservatives at all levels are crap at governing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thank goodness Republicans are going after the REAL criminal here - the Indiana doctor who shared the child's story

Wait abortion records are public documents in Indiana????? So anyone who terminated would be public knowledge?

WTAF?

This is not surprising or anything to freak out about. The vast majority of states collect and report abortion data and have for decades. Only a handful don’t. As things are currently doesn’t mean that the individual who terminated is identified (I wouldn’t be surprised if that changes in the coming years, of course, the way things are going.) What is typically reported is the facility, patient demographics like age and marital status, gestational age, and the procedure used. This is where we get abortion statistics from.

He is trying to pull identifying data from the reports.

I’m not saying what he’s doing is right, but a PP said “so anyone who terminated would be public knowledge?” And no, that is not true. He’s saying no abortion on a 10 year old patient was reported. Demographic info like age is required to report just like it is in all but a handful of states. So either it never happened, or the doctor failed to report it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/catherine-glenn-foster-abortion-eric-swalwell-b2123411.html

The president of an anti-abortion legal advocacy group told a House committee this week that abortion care for a 10-year-old girl would not be considered an abortion.

If this doesn't prove that forced birthers are about punishing women for having sex, I don't know what is.

-former religious "pro-life" person who knows it's about punishing women for having sex.

Forced birthers are stuck, now. Theyve been saying no abortions because the fetus and embryo are people with equal rights to life.

But they know they can’t deny a raped 10 year old an abortion. That is politically unpalatable.

So they have to say if the pregnancy will affect the health of the mother, ending it isn’t an abortion. It is justified, therefore it is not an abortion. Because abortions are only when you end a pregnancy for no good reason.

This line of reasoning will not, however, get them where they think it will get them… but they aren’t smart enough to see the flaws in this argument.

Like most conservatives, they are crap on the details of governing, and legislation.

If Republicans truly believe that life begins at the instant of conception, how can they also argue that a child conceived via rape is worth less than a child conceived via consensual sex (which they are now doing apparently)?

They don’t feel limited by facts or reason.

They will make up whatever random laws they want to penalize whom ever they want. Just because they feel like it. No rational arguments. No informed opinions.

Ignorant, irrational tyranny.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/catherine-glenn-foster-abortion-eric-swalwell-b2123411.html

The president of an anti-abortion legal advocacy group told a House committee this week that abortion care for a 10-year-old girl would not be considered an abortion.

If this doesn't prove that forced birthers are about punishing women for having sex, I don't know what is.

-former religious "pro-life" person who knows it's about punishing women for having sex.

Forced birthers are stuck, now. Theyve been saying no abortions because the fetus and embryo are people with equal rights to life.

But they know they can’t deny a raped 10 year old an abortion. That is politically unpalatable.

So they have to say if the pregnancy will affect the health of the mother, ending it isn’t an abortion. It is justified, therefore it is not an abortion. Because abortions are only when you end a pregnancy for no good reason.

This line of reasoning will not, however, get them where they think it will get them… but they aren’t smart enough to see the flaws in this argument.

Like most conservatives, they are crap on the details of governing, and legislation.

If Republicans truly believe that life begins at the instant of conception, how can they also argue that a child conceived via rape is worth less than a child conceived via consensual sex (which they are now doing apparently)?

They don’t feel limited by facts or reason.

They will make up whatever random laws they want to penalize whom ever they want. Just because they feel like it. No rational arguments. No informed opinions.

Ignorant, irrational tyranny.

True, but logically Republicans have now been forced to concede that either:

1. Life *doesn’t* actually begin at the instant of conception.

Or…

2. 10-year olds should be required to carry their rapist’s child to term.

So which is it?

I think sensible pro-choice folks took notice of these vexing issues a long time ago and voted to keep abortion legal for situations like this. Republicans, on the other hand, wanted to force a very narrow morality on all of us and are now back-pedaling furiously from the consequences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thank goodness Republicans are going after the REAL criminal here - the Indiana doctor who shared the child's story

Wait abortion records are public documents in Indiana????? So anyone who terminated would be public knowledge?

“TPRs.” Lord, the horrifying combination of Office Space and The Handmaid’s Tale in which we now live.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/catherine-glenn-foster-abortion-eric-swalwell-b2123411.html

The president of an anti-abortion legal advocacy group told a House committee this week that abortion care for a 10-year-old girl would not be considered an abortion.

If this doesn't prove that forced birthers are about punishing women for having sex, I don't know what is.

-former religious "pro-life" person who knows it's about punishing women for having sex.

Forced birthers are stuck, now. Theyve been saying no abortions because the fetus and embryo are people with equal rights to life.

But they know they can’t deny a raped 10 year old an abortion. That is politically unpalatable.

So they have to say if the pregnancy will affect the health of the mother, ending it isn’t an abortion. It is justified, therefore it is not an abortion. Because abortions are only when you end a pregnancy for no good reason.

This line of reasoning will not, however, get them where they think it will get them… but they aren’t smart enough to see the flaws in this argument.

Like most conservatives, they are crap on the details of governing, and legislation.

This is incorrect. Conservatives are pretty good at governing. The problem is when loons drive out actual conservatives. There aren't that many actual conservatives left around.

“Conservatives” want to destroy government except when it serves the goal of owning the libs. They have sucked at governing since Reagan. Cutting taxes to cut government programs — but not the military — and endless wars isn’t “good at governing.”

There are 50 states, many of them have local or state governments that are governed by conservatives. The world is larger than Congress.

FYI, owning the libs is a loon goal, not a conservative one.

Sadly, there is no party of actual conservatives anymore. The GOP IS the loon party.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thank goodness Republicans are going after the REAL criminal here - the Indiana doctor who shared the child's story

Wait abortion records are public documents in Indiana????? So anyone who terminated would be public knowledge?

WTAF?

This is not surprising or anything to freak out about. The vast majority of states collect and report abortion data and have for decades. Only a handful don’t. As things are currently doesn’t mean that the individual who terminated is identified (I wouldn’t be surprised if that changes in the coming years, of course, the way things are going.) What is typically reported is the facility, patient demographics like age and marital status, gestational age, and the procedure used. This is where we get abortion statistics from.

He is trying to pull identifying data from the reports.

I’m not saying what he’s doing is right, but a PP said “so anyone who terminated would be public knowledge?” And no, that is not true. He’s saying no abortion on a 10 year old patient was reported. Demographic info like age is required to report just like it is in all but a handful of states. So either it never happened, or the doctor failed to report it.

Actually, what he said is that so far no records of a report have been produced. His letter also acknowledges that the new system is slower to review, and never says the records have been reviewed exhaustively. The agency had only acknowledged the request the day before Rokita sent his letter, and he didn’t want to wait for confirmation before sending the letter because if it turned out the doctor had reported it, he wouldn’t be able to make public threats against the doctor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thank goodness Republicans are going after the REAL criminal here - the Indiana doctor who shared the child's story

Wait abortion records are public documents in Indiana????? So anyone who terminated would be public knowledge?

“TPRs.” Lord, the horrifying combination of Office Space and The Handmaid’s Tale in which we now live.

Now? Indiana has public abortion reports published on their state website as far back as 2000. This is not new and it’s important data to collect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/catherine-glenn-foster-abortion-eric-swalwell-b2123411.html

The president of an anti-abortion legal advocacy group told a House committee this week that abortion care for a 10-year-old girl would not be considered an abortion.

If this doesn't prove that forced birthers are about punishing women for having sex, I don't know what is.

-former religious "pro-life" person who knows it's about punishing women for having sex.

Forced birthers are stuck, now. Theyve been saying no abortions because the fetus and embryo are people with equal rights to life.

But they know they can’t deny a raped 10 year old an abortion. That is politically unpalatable.

So they have to say if the pregnancy will affect the health of the mother, ending it isn’t an abortion. It is justified, therefore it is not an abortion. Because abortions are only when you end a pregnancy for no good reason.

This line of reasoning will not, however, get them where they think it will get them… but they aren’t smart enough to see the flaws in this argument.

Like most conservatives, they are crap on the details of governing, and legislation.

This is incorrect. Conservatives are pretty good at governing. The problem is when loons drive out actual conservatives. There aren't that many actual conservatives left around.

“Conservatives” want to destroy government except when it serves the goal of owning the libs. They have sucked at governing since Reagan. Cutting taxes to cut government programs — but not the military — and endless wars isn’t “good at governing.”

There are 50 states, many of them have local or state governments that are governed by conservatives. The world is larger than Congress.

FYI, owning the libs is a loon goal, not a conservative one.

Look I get that you want to put yourself on a pedestal but “loon” and “conservative” are the same thing now. You all voted that way. You’ve voted for every hateful loon no matter how bad they were.

We see you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
This is incorrect. Conservatives are pretty good at governing. The problem is when loons drive out actual conservatives. There aren't that many actual conservatives left around.

"No True Scotsman."