New Alexandra Petri column about abortion rights

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our system of laws puts the rights of certain people before others all the time. I don’t give a flying fart if you think that clump of cells is a human being. Even if I concede it is, which I don’t, my life is more important and damn you to hell for saying it’s not and sending women to their graves because of it. I mean it sincerely. You will be judged for your political games.

What a dumb ass comment. It's not a mainstream position to argue against abortions in case of life or serious health threats to the mother.

Are you a dumbass? What do you think overturning Roe will mean?

LOL, thanks for showing just how ignorant you are. Overturning Roe simply turns over the issue to the states until a constitutional amendment can be passed that enshrines abortion as a right. If a state passes a complete abortion ban even if the life/health of the mother is in jeopardy, the solution is simple: move.

Oh cupcake.

“Move” requires resources. You know that. We know you know that. We know you know you’re only taking rights away from poor women. No one is missing that cleverly concealed point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our system of laws puts the rights of certain people before others all the time. I don’t give a flying fart if you think that clump of cells is a human being. Even if I concede it is, which I don’t, my life is more important and damn you to hell for saying it’s not and sending women to their graves because of it. I mean it sincerely. You will be judged for your political games.

What a dumb ass comment. It's not a mainstream position to argue against abortions in case of life or serious health threats to the mother.

Are you a dumbass? What do you think overturning Roe will mean?

And I’m sorry to break it to you, but pregnancy is a serious health threat to every woman. Look up US maternal mortality rates and get back to me. And that’s with legal abortion possible. Pregnancy needs to be a choice. Period.

The maternal mortality rate in the US is about 17 per 100,000. The mortality for the flu is 15 per 100,000. Can you justify killing your kids because they may bring back flu from school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our system of laws puts the rights of certain people before others all the time. I don’t give a flying fart if you think that clump of cells is a human being. Even if I concede it is, which I don’t, my life is more important and damn you to hell for saying it’s not and sending women to their graves because of it. I mean it sincerely. You will be judged for your political games.

What a dumb ass comment. It's not a mainstream position to argue against abortions in case of life or serious health threats to the mother.

Are you a dumbass? What do you think overturning Roe will mean?

And I’m sorry to break it to you, but pregnancy is a serious health threat to every woman. Look up US maternal mortality rates and get back to me. And that’s with legal abortion possible. Pregnancy needs to be a choice. Period.

The maternal mortality rate in the US is about 17 per 100,000. The mortality for the flu is 15 per 100,000. Can you justify killing your kids because they may bring back flu from school?

Try looking it up for Black women in Mississippi. More than twice that high. That’s a coincidence the “pro-life” group is ok with though for some reason I can’t quite figure out...

Oh right it’s that they’re racist!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our system of laws puts the rights of certain people before others all the time. I don’t give a flying fart if you think that clump of cells is a human being. Even if I concede it is, which I don’t, my life is more important and damn you to hell for saying it’s not and sending women to their graves because of it. I mean it sincerely. You will be judged for your political games.

What a dumb ass comment. It's not a mainstream position to argue against abortions in case of life or serious health threats to the mother.

But who decides what case of life or serious health threat to the mother is? Is partial disability not acceptable? Long term health consequences? Is up to the specialist that the women is seeing? Do they decide or is it state-specific and determined by a council of experts or politicians?

Is it covered by insurance?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our system of laws puts the rights of certain people before others all the time. I don’t give a flying fart if you think that clump of cells is a human being. Even if I concede it is, which I don’t, my life is more important and damn you to hell for saying it’s not and sending women to their graves because of it. I mean it sincerely. You will be judged for your political games.

What a dumb ass comment. It's not a mainstream position to argue against abortions in case of life or serious health threats to the mother.

Are you a dumbass? What do you think overturning Roe will mean?

LOL, thanks for showing just how ignorant you are. Overturning Roe simply turns over the issue to the states until a constitutional amendment can be passed that enshrines abortion as a right. If a state passes a complete abortion ban even if the life/health of the mother is in jeopardy, the solution is simple: move.

Oh cupcake.

“Move” requires resources. You know that. We know you know that. We know you know you’re only taking rights away from poor women. No one is missing that cleverly concealed point.

Poor women seem to have no problems moving between whole countries, so I don't see that it's an insurmountable burden to move to a different state if someone is concerned about their life/health.

For me to take a right away, means the right has to exist in the first place. And that's the whole argument: there is no fundamental right to abortion for convenience. I believe there is a right to abortion to protect one's own life/health but the supreme court has sidestepped that question thus far by trying to navigate around twisted logic to fit Roe in the name of precedence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our system of laws puts the rights of certain people before others all the time. I don’t give a flying fart if you think that clump of cells is a human being. Even if I concede it is, which I don’t, my life is more important and damn you to hell for saying it’s not and sending women to their graves because of it. I mean it sincerely. You will be judged for your political games.

What a dumb ass comment. It's not a mainstream position to argue against abortions in case of life or serious health threats to the mother.

But who decides what case of life or serious health threat to the mother is? Is partial disability not acceptable? Long term health consequences? Is up to the specialist that the women is seeing? Do they decide or is it state-specific and determined by a council of experts or politicians?

Is it covered by insurance?

If we consider Texas “mainstream” their benevolent exceptions are 1. Death or 2. “substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function”

Chronic pain for life?

Brain damage in delivery?

PPD?

You’re just SOL

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our system of laws puts the rights of certain people before others all the time. I don’t give a flying fart if you think that clump of cells is a human being. Even if I concede it is, which I don’t, my life is more important and damn you to hell for saying it’s not and sending women to their graves because of it. I mean it sincerely. You will be judged for your political games.

What a dumb ass comment. It's not a mainstream position to argue against abortions in case of life or serious health threats to the mother.

Are you a dumbass? What do you think overturning Roe will mean?

And I’m sorry to break it to you, but pregnancy is a serious health threat to every woman. Look up US maternal mortality rates and get back to me. And that’s with legal abortion possible. Pregnancy needs to be a choice. Period.

The maternal mortality rate in the US is about 17 per 100,000. The mortality for the flu is 15 per 100,000. Can you justify killing your kids because they may bring back flu from school?

Try looking it up for Black women in Mississippi. More than twice that high. That’s a coincidence the “pro-life” group is ok with though for some reason I can’t quite figure out...

Oh right it’s that they’re racist!

Flu mortality is higher for blacks as well so the ratio stands. Do you advocate killing off children because they pose a "serious threat" to the mothers for bringing home flu?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our system of laws puts the rights of certain people before others all the time. I don’t give a flying fart if you think that clump of cells is a human being. Even if I concede it is, which I don’t, my life is more important and damn you to hell for saying it’s not and sending women to their graves because of it. I mean it sincerely. You will be judged for your political games.

What a dumb ass comment. It's not a mainstream position to argue against abortions in case of life or serious health threats to the mother.

Are you a dumbass? What do you think overturning Roe will mean?

LOL, thanks for showing just how ignorant you are. Overturning Roe simply turns over the issue to the states until a constitutional amendment can be passed that enshrines abortion as a right. If a state passes a complete abortion ban even if the life/health of the mother is in jeopardy, the solution is simple: move.

Oh cupcake.

“Move” requires resources. You know that. We know you know that. We know you know you’re only taking rights away from poor women. No one is missing that cleverly concealed point.

Poor women seem to have no problems moving between whole countries, so I don't see that it's an insurmountable burden to move to a different state if someone is concerned about their life/health.

For me to take a right away, means the right has to exist in the first place. And that's the whole argument: there is no fundamental right to abortion for convenience. I believe there is a right to abortion to protect one's own life/health but the supreme court has sidestepped that question thus far by trying to navigate around twisted logic to fit Roe in the name of precedence.

You hear that, you dirty sloots!? Forced birthers want you to suffer if you got yourself pregnant having a good time! Your needs, goals, life… none of it matters unless you’re having a “good” abortion.

I wonder how all the forced birther women think about the abortions they got just because they didn’t want to be pregnant. Probably some special clause like, “I support making other women miserable for not wanting to be pregnant and have a child, therefore *my* abortion is special and just.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our system of laws puts the rights of certain people before others all the time. I don’t give a flying fart if you think that clump of cells is a human being. Even if I concede it is, which I don’t, my life is more important and damn you to hell for saying it’s not and sending women to their graves because of it. I mean it sincerely. You will be judged for your political games.

What a dumb ass comment. It's not a mainstream position to argue against abortions in case of life or serious health threats to the mother.

Are you a dumbass? What do you think overturning Roe will mean?

LOL, thanks for showing just how ignorant you are. Overturning Roe simply turns over the issue to the states until a constitutional amendment can be passed that enshrines abortion as a right. If a state passes a complete abortion ban even if the life/health of the mother is in jeopardy, the solution is simple: move.

Oh cupcake.

“Move” requires resources. You know that. We know you know that. We know you know you’re only taking rights away from poor women. No one is missing that cleverly concealed point.

Poor women seem to have no problems moving between whole countries, so I don't see that it's an insurmountable burden to move to a different state if someone is concerned about their life/health.

For me to take a right away, means the right has to exist in the first place. And that's the whole argument: there is no fundamental right to abortion for convenience. I believe there is a right to abortion to protect one's own life/health but the supreme court has sidestepped that question thus far by trying to navigate around twisted logic to fit Roe in the name of precedence.

Today and until the court rules, there is a right to abortion. You disagree with its existence but it does exist.

On the day that right is revoked, it is revoked only for poor women. A woman with adequate means to travel to an enlightened state will continue to do so. So the end of the “right” to abortion is only an end to the right of abortion for poor women. If the theocracy continues unabated that will still be true— women with resources will travel to Canada or Europe as they did historically. The right will continue to exist for women with resources until you people have us taking pregnancy tests to leave the country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An unborn child (fetus) is a human. Change my mind.

Why aren’t you fighting for the up to 50% of in-utero humans who die of spontaneous abortion each year? Imagine how many human lives could be saved if more tax dollars were directed to identifying and preventing the cause of spontaneous abortion.

We already do. It's called prenatal care.

Most OB-GYNs wont see you until 8-10 weeks. At that point you are already half way to 20 weeks, and 3/4-5/6 of the way to 12 (end of 1st trimester). Its a joke to think prenatal care does anything for 1st trimester spontaneous abortions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our system of laws puts the rights of certain people before others all the time. I don’t give a flying fart if you think that clump of cells is a human being. Even if I concede it is, which I don’t, my life is more important and damn you to hell for saying it’s not and sending women to their graves because of it. I mean it sincerely. You will be judged for your political games.

What a dumb ass comment. It's not a mainstream position to argue against abortions in case of life or serious health threats to the mother.

Are you a dumbass? What do you think overturning Roe will mean?

And I’m sorry to break it to you, but pregnancy is a serious health threat to every woman. Look up US maternal mortality rates and get back to me. And that’s with legal abortion possible. Pregnancy needs to be a choice. Period.

The maternal mortality rate in the US is about 17 per 100,000. The mortality for the flu is 15 per 100,000. Can you justify killing your kids because they may bring back flu from school?

Try looking it up for Black women in Mississippi. More than twice that high. That’s a coincidence the “pro-life” group is ok with though for some reason I can’t quite figure out...

Oh right it’s that they’re racist!

Flu mortality is higher for blacks as well so the ratio stands. Do you advocate killing off children because they pose a "serious threat" to the mothers for bringing home flu?

Flu mortality for Black communities is not three times as high as the national average. Google is your friend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our system of laws puts the rights of certain people before others all the time. I don’t give a flying fart if you think that clump of cells is a human being. Even if I concede it is, which I don’t, my life is more important and damn you to hell for saying it’s not and sending women to their graves because of it. I mean it sincerely. You will be judged for your political games.

What a dumb ass comment. It's not a mainstream position to argue against abortions in case of life or serious health threats to the mother.

Are you a dumbass? What do you think overturning Roe will mean?

And I’m sorry to break it to you, but pregnancy is a serious health threat to every woman. Look up US maternal mortality rates and get back to me. And that’s with legal abortion possible. Pregnancy needs to be a choice. Period.

The maternal mortality rate in the US is about 17 per 100,000. The mortality for the flu is 15 per 100,000. Can you justify killing your kids because they may bring back flu from school?

Try looking it up for Black women in Mississippi. More than twice that high. That’s a coincidence the “pro-life” group is ok with though for some reason I can’t quite figure out...

Oh right it’s that they’re racist!

Flu mortality is higher for blacks as well so the ratio stands. Do you advocate killing off children because they pose a "serious threat" to the mothers for bringing home flu?

Uh. I don’t advocate denying a 100% effective treatment for the flu?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Flu mortality is higher for blacks as well so the ratio stands. Do you advocate killing off children because they pose a "serious threat" to the mothers for bringing home flu?

So let’s review: you just make up/ignore statistics to suit your argument, then you leap to a modest proposal that literally no one is making. I bet you think that gun deaths in schools are made up/the price we pay for Jimbo and Ricky having whatever guns they want and that vaccine mandates are slavery.

Forced birthers are not sensible people.

[Anonymous]

Every pregnancy is a risk to the life and well being of a woman. Every pregnancy must be a choice. The end.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our system of laws puts the rights of certain people before others all the time. I don’t give a flying fart if you think that clump of cells is a human being. Even if I concede it is, which I don’t, my life is more important and damn you to hell for saying it’s not and sending women to their graves because of it. I mean it sincerely. You will be judged for your political games.

What a dumb ass comment. It's not a mainstream position to argue against abortions in case of life or serious health threats to the mother.

Are you a dumbass? What do you think overturning Roe will mean?

And I’m sorry to break it to you, but pregnancy is a serious health threat to every woman. Look up US maternal mortality rates and get back to me. And that’s with legal abortion possible. Pregnancy needs to be a choice. Period.

The maternal mortality rate in the US is about 17 per 100,000. The mortality for the flu is 15 per 100,000. Can you justify killing your kids because they may bring back flu from school?

Try looking it up for Black women in Mississippi. More than twice that high. That’s a coincidence the “pro-life” group is ok with though for some reason I can’t quite figure out...

Oh right it’s that they’re racist!

Flu mortality is higher for blacks as well so the ratio stands. Do you advocate killing off children because they pose a "serious threat" to the mothers for bringing home flu?

All I’m advocating for is not being forced to continue a pregnancy against my will.