Official Abortion Thread

[Anonymous]

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!!!!

PP from directly above, I forgot to add that birth control should be free and available to all!!

Along with an incentive to make people use the free birth control. A boatload if condoms can be within arms reach, but if the man won’t put one on, what does the woman do? you

easy...not have sex with him. Take responsibility for your actions. Hard concept for liberal women I know...but try it some time.

[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!!!!

PP from directly above, I forgot to add that birth control should be free and available to all!!

Along with an incentive to make people use the free birth control. A boatload if condoms can be within arms reach, but if the man won’t put one on, what does the woman do? you

easy...not have sex with him. Take responsibility for your actions. Hard concept for liberal women I know...but try it some time.

Universal vasectomy policy will ensure men and women reproduce responsibly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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!!!!

PP from directly above, I forgot to add that birth control should be free and available to all!!

Along with an incentive to make people use the free birth control. A boatload if condoms can be within arms reach, but if the man won’t put one on, what does the woman do? you

easy...not have sex with him. Take responsibility for your actions. Hard concept for liberal women I know...but try it some time.

Universal vasectomy policy will ensure men and women reproduce responsibly.

Men register for the selective service to get drafted to go to war.
Women should make the sacrifice and get their tubes tied instead. That way we know people will reproduce responsibility.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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!!!!

PP from directly above, I forgot to add that birth control should be free and available to all!!

Along with an incentive to make people use the free birth control. A boatload if condoms can be within arms reach, but if the man won’t put one on, what does the woman do? you

easy...not have sex with him. Take responsibility for your actions. Hard concept for liberal women I know...but try it some time.

Universal vasectomy policy will ensure men and women reproduce responsibly.

Men register for the selective service to get drafted to go to war.
Women should make the sacrifice and get their tubes tied instead. That way we know people will reproduce responsibility.

Men and women can register for the draft. But you've made extremely clear that you believe the woman is the gatekeeper, so not sure why she needs additional responsibilities. It's men's responsibility that has been missing from the conversation. So, mandatory universal vasectomy at 16.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

My belief that an unborn baby should not be killed is showing.

Poor kids should not be sentenced to death. They are people with a right to life.

A vast majority of the world is born into, lives, and dies in poverty. Do we kill them? Do we discount them?

I am excited to see the tide turning in America. People are going to fight very hard to re-elect Trump so it may continue.

They have a right to a crappy life in abusive family going to bed hungry every night until they are shot in their school?

Pass.

You get to do you. Most of America isn’t behind you. And they aren’t going to be. These bills are for show and will be stayed and die.



The age of Trump has made something click in my brain. It not only tells me where I will never went to move or spend money again. It makes me Republican light, economically. I’d rather have much lower federal taxes and just do the bare minimum and have high state ones. I want to send shithole states like Alabama no federal money for a social safety net, and pay a lot more at the state and local level to make Virginia a state with free college, mandated paid parental leave, subsidized childcare, universal healthcare and excellent schools. That’s what I want the children I choose to have to have access to.

We have completely different values. You are trying to take away my choices, so I am done subsidizing yours. No more WIC, SNAP, Title I, SSI at the federal level. Send it through the state, and the states where they force women to have kids they can’t take care of can quit relying on me to bail them out.

Most mass school shootings occur in what passes for middle class schools in communities where they occur. The only relationship between abortion and gun use is the individual murderers who may randomly kill a school age child or two in the course of committing a crime.

[Anonymous]

tubal ligation is a much more difficult procedure than getting the snip for men. It is also easier to reverse the procedure in men.

since they are the impregnators who basically have no responsibility after the deed, I really don't think it is too much to ask

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Anti-abortion” is such a cliche for enraged incels who want to punish women for sleeping with men other than themselves. How weak. No wonder no one will sleep with you.

Alonso’s half of women polled are pro-life. The percentage between men and women is only 2%. There’s half a chance the people lobbying for pro-life are women.

So it isn’t incels. I’m divorced and dating a great woman. So I’m not some incel. I’ve dated women from all walks of life from Ivy League grad to basic state college, different races and political views. Americans, Israelis, Latino and Europeans. If politics would come up there were plenty of pro-life women.

Why do you think you have any say with what happens to women’s bodies?

I don’t. But almost half of women think the baby has a right to live and not he murdered. As a man if the child is mine I have half a say as wel

Only if you can gestate it in your own body.

Then have protected sex. The amount of failure rates of birth control measures is very small. Women don't like to take responsibility for their own actions, it's seriously an epidemic.

You had sex, the child is both of yours, he gets a say.

He chose not to get a vasectomy or wear a condom, he gets no say.

She chose not to use BC, diaphragm and IUD...he gets a say.

Nope if she chose not to use BC he should have kept his pants zipped. Very irresponsible of him to engage in sex when he knew he wasn’t protected from conceiving or disease. Therefore he doesn’t get to decide what happens to her body.

[Anonymous]

you know there are some women who cannot use any form of hormonal birth control and for whom lots of other methods of birth control are also not reliable, right?

Diaphragms are especially tricky, since they are dependent on proper placement AND fluctuations in weight.

[Anonymous]

A 9 year old is as much a baby as a 9 week old fetus, but cons think the fetus has more rights.

[Anonymous]

Let's assume, for a sec, that a fetus is a baby. Fine. In effect, these laws are forcing women to donate their bodies to keep their babies alive. Why, then, does that end at birth? Where are all the laws that will force biological parents to give their body parts to their kids if needed to keep them alive? Where is the law that forces dads to give up blood, pieces of their liver, their kidneys, their lungs, their bone marrow, if their kids need a transplant?

I asked this back on page 33 and never got a response. Pro-forced-birthers, would you support such laws?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've been reading a lot of the #youknowme stories and they're just proving the point of anti-abortionists- that abortion is being used as birth control. .. rather than women taking the initiative to protect themselves from pregnancy in the first place. "Oh I can just have my fetus killed because I'm not ready to be a mother."
If abortion is not an option in these cases you better believe there will be more responsible bc use.
Also, a D&C because of miscarriage is not an abortion by the laws definition.
The # was created to reduce the shame and stigma but it's pretty appalling.

Research pretty well proves the opposite -- liberal access to reproductive healthcare in all forms (abortion, birth control, sex ed) reduces unwanted pregnancy and abortion. European countries prove this over and over again.

Colorado had a program that provided free long term birth control. Unwanted pregnancy rates and abortion rates went way down. Republicans took it away. With that decision, the anti choice movement showed their goal isn’t success in lowering abortion rates by preventing pregnancy. It’s only acceptable to lower abortion rates by saddling women who have sex with babies.

Access to long term birth control works. Reducing unwanted pregnancies works.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:tubal ligation is a much more difficult procedure than getting the snip for men. It is also easier to reverse the procedure in men.

since they are the impregnators who basically have no responsibility after the deed, I really don't think it is too much to ask

Brilliant. And think of all the money and time women would save!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Let's assume, for a sec, that a fetus is a baby. Fine. In effect, these laws are forcing women to donate their bodies to keep their babies alive. Why, then, does that end at birth? Where are all the laws that will force biological parents to give their body parts to their kids if needed to keep them alive? Where is the law that forces dads to give up blood, pieces of their liver, their kidneys, their lungs, their bone marrow, if their kids need a transplant?

I asked this back on page 33 and never got a response. Pro-forced-birthers, would you support such laws?

Ok, I don’t agree with the AL law, but regarding the above: maybe.
However, pro-abortion folks always argue that it’s ok to kill a fetus but not a born child because only one individual (the mother) can keep the fetus alive, whereas others could take care of a newborn. Likewise, more than one individual could conceivably donate an organ or blood to a child. Can’t have it both ways.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Anti-abortion” is such a cliche for enraged incels who want to punish women for sleeping with men other than themselves. How weak. No wonder no one will sleep with you.

Alonso’s half of women polled are pro-life. The percentage between men and women is only 2%. There’s half a chance the people lobbying for pro-life are women.

So it isn’t incels. I’m divorced and dating a great woman. So I’m not some incel. I’ve dated women from all walks of life from Ivy League grad to basic state college, different races and political views. Americans, Israelis, Latino and Europeans. If politics would come up there were plenty of pro-life women.

Why do you think you have any say with what happens to women’s bodies?

I don’t. But almost half of women think the baby has a right to live and not he murdered. As a man if the child is mine I have half a say as wel

Only if you can gestate it in your own body.

Then have protected sex. The amount of failure rates of birth control measures is very small. Women don't like to take responsibility for their own actions, it's seriously an epidemic.

You had sex, the child is both of yours, he gets a say.

So if someone uses birth control and it fails through non fault of their own, have they “earned” an abortion?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Don't worry feminists, no one is coming after your abortions...we just want common sense abortion control

Roe v Wade already sets out common sense “abortion control.”