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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is absolutely true that the eugenics movement was a liberal progressive movement (using today’s political terms), but there were plenty of conservatives who also actively promoted the movement. Although its roots were in the liberal progressives, and the thought leadership was in that group, it was enthusiastically embraced by conservatives. In other words, while it is true Sanger was a racist who specifically targeted Black women, she was hardly alone and had plenty of conservatives along with her.

In short, yes, we have a very ugly history of eugenics and yes, the abortion rights movement is part of that, but not just that movement.

I’m curious about the person who keeps saying that close to 100% of parents choose to terminate for genetic abnormalities in places like Iceland. Do you think that makes that termination morally and ethically right? There has been a lot in human history that was done universally that we now recognize as abhorrent. Personally I do not think it is a good thing for us as a society to eliminate all children with genetic abnormalities routinely.

I'm not concerned with other people's morals and ethics.

I have a dear friend with a severely disabled child whose disorder is rare enough to not be diagnosed in utero with routinely offered tests. The child will never develop cognitively, eat without a tube, talk, or walk unassisted. My friend, who is lucky enough to be UMC and highly educated, went to hell and back coping with this, and arranging the necessary medical and childcare support for the child. The family's financial position has been altered forever. The mother now also has significant depression due to this.

She is 100% clear that had she known ahead of time, she'd 100% terminate. And in fact when she had gathered enough courage to have another child, she had the pregnancy checked up and down, and was again 100% clear that in case of any issues, she'd terminate without a second thought.

So, the feelings of someone who is actually living through this situation is good enough for me. It would be the height of arrogance for anyone to tell her, well, that's how your cookie crumbled, live with it! No termination for you!

That is literally the function of government, aside from national defense.

[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:Abortion numbers have actually increased since Dobbs. Funny how that works!

As a mom of two daughters, reproductive freedom is my top voting issue. Same with my first time presidential election voting daughter. We showed up and voted last week.

Nice to you know you're raising your daughter in fear of false dilemmas without the critical stamina to understand that women are in far worse danger of subjugation under the regime that is allowing men to invade their spaces, their jobs, their sports. You are not being a good role model for your daughter when you teach her that the most important issue for electing a president is how far along in pregnancy a woman can abort her child. Question: has Harris said how she will overturn the Scotus decision?

What a load of bologna. I am definitely raising my daughters and sons to be able to see through that kind of b*******.

Explain to your sons and daughters the critical importance of reproductive rights and explain to them how to fight and vote to get them.

Why do you keep saying reproductive rights when what you mean is abortion? You can turn yourself inside out all you want, you are still advocating for ending the lives of fetuses. These are not 'clumps of cells.' These are fully-formed, human beings, who, after about 12 weeks, have to be pulled apart and killed in utero.

Ok scoldylocks, I wouldn't even have kids to teach if it wasn't for IVF like millions of other moms. And darling, some of the embryos don't make it when you do IVF.

I've got this issue covered with my kids. I don't need any help from the likes of you.

I'm the PP you're responding to, and I also had my children through IVF--actual IVF, not the IUI, as the Walzes did then lied about. In any event, it is a red herring to talk about "reproductive rights" and you know it. You are not voting about IVF, you are voting about abortion and cannot be honest with yourself. I am fully aware of how IVF works by the way. And you know what else, two of my IVF babies were born at 20 weeks. I held them for the 2 hours they lived and breathed outside of my uterus. Kissed them and told them how much I loved them. Are you the kind of person who calls those "clumps of cells?"

Well then from one IVF mom to another.... I don't know why you don't understand this..... but the destruction of Roe threatens IVF as a fertility treatment. If you want to fully protect access to IVF and some other fertility treatments...And yes also abortion, which is the flip side of fertility treatments, Daniel then we then we need to fight to get back the protections of Roe. Voting for Harris it's the beginning of this process.

Actually, as an"IVF mom" (though, I don't know identify myself that way), I am hopeful that the technology is as close as it sounds to not have to produce and discard embryos. I am a massive hypocrite, because the discarding of embryos bothers me. I did not discard any. We had multiple rounds--as I mentioned, two of them were delivered and died at 20 weeks, and the rest were used in multiple attempts. It would pain me to discard of them. Nonetheless, not a single state has taken a step to ban IVF, so again, red herring.

Did you really miss that the Alabama Supreme Court issued a ruling in February declaring that embryos created through in IVF should be considered children?

Do you really not understand that this is not banning IVF?

Do you really not understand that the risk is not an IVF ban? The clinics that halted the procedure made that decision all by themselves to avoid the risks of facing catastrophic liabilities.

Which is still not a ban. The government isn't stopping them; they are self-regulating.

The court is stopping them through the threat of criminal prosecution. You can't do IVF without discarding human embryos. But you know that, but you're playing the part (quite well) of stupid.

Over 2% of all births in the United States every year result from IVF procedures.

[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:Abortion numbers have actually increased since Dobbs. Funny how that works!

As a mom of two daughters, reproductive freedom is my top voting issue. Same with my first time presidential election voting daughter. We showed up and voted last week.

Nice to you know you're raising your daughter in fear of false dilemmas without the critical stamina to understand that women are in far worse danger of subjugation under the regime that is allowing men to invade their spaces, their jobs, their sports. You are not being a good role model for your daughter when you teach her that the most important issue for electing a president is how far along in pregnancy a woman can abort her child. Question: has Harris said how she will overturn the Scotus decision?

What a load of bologna. I am definitely raising my daughters and sons to be able to see through that kind of b*******.

Explain to your sons and daughters the critical importance of reproductive rights and explain to them how to fight and vote to get them.

Why do you keep saying reproductive rights when what you mean is abortion? You can turn yourself inside out all you want, you are still advocating for ending the lives of fetuses. These are not 'clumps of cells.' These are fully-formed, human beings, who, after about 12 weeks, have to be pulled apart and killed in utero.

Ok scoldylocks, I wouldn't even have kids to teach if it wasn't for IVF like millions of other moms. And darling, some of the embryos don't make it when you do IVF.

I've got this issue covered with my kids. I don't need any help from the likes of you.

I'm the PP you're responding to, and I also had my children through IVF--actual IVF, not the IUI, as the Walzes did then lied about. In any event, it is a red herring to talk about "reproductive rights" and you know it. You are not voting about IVF, you are voting about abortion and cannot be honest with yourself. I am fully aware of how IVF works by the way. And you know what else, two of my IVF babies were born at 20 weeks. I held them for the 2 hours they lived and breathed outside of my uterus. Kissed them and told them how much I loved them. Are you the kind of person who calls those "clumps of cells?"

Well then from one IVF mom to another.... I don't know why you don't understand this..... but the destruction of Roe threatens IVF as a fertility treatment. If you want to fully protect access to IVF and some other fertility treatments...And yes also abortion, which is the flip side of fertility treatments, Daniel then we then we need to fight to get back the protections of Roe. Voting for Harris it's the beginning of this process.

Actually, as an"IVF mom" (though, I don't know identify myself that way), I am hopeful that the technology is as close as it sounds to not have to produce and discard embryos. I am a massive hypocrite, because the discarding of embryos bothers me. I did not discard any. We had multiple rounds--as I mentioned, two of them were delivered and died at 20 weeks, and the rest were used in multiple attempts. It would pain me to discard of them. Nonetheless, not a single state has taken a step to ban IVF, so again, red herring.

Did you really miss that the Alabama Supreme Court issued a ruling in February declaring that embryos created through in IVF should be considered children?

Do you really not understand that this is not banning IVF?

Do you really not understand that the risk is not an IVF ban? The clinics that halted the procedure made that decision all by themselves to avoid the risks of facing catastrophic liabilities.

Which is still not a ban. The government isn't stopping them; they are self-regulating.

The court is stopping them through the threat of criminal prosecution. You can't do IVF without discarding human embryos. But you know that, but you're playing the part (quite well) of stupid.

Over 2% of all births in the United States every year result from IVF procedures.

I can't imagine that most of these families and all of the millions of other people that have these IVF people in their lives are unaware of the threats to this treatment posed by the destruction of Roe. These voters need to come out in force on November 5th.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is absolutely true that the eugenics movement was a liberal progressive movement (using today’s political terms), but there were plenty of conservatives who also actively promoted the movement. Although its roots were in the liberal progressives, and the thought leadership was in that group, it was enthusiastically embraced by conservatives. In other words, while it is true Sanger was a racist who specifically targeted Black women, she was hardly alone and had plenty of conservatives along with her.

In short, yes, we have a very ugly history of eugenics and yes, the abortion rights movement is part of that, but not just that movement.

I’m curious about the person who keeps saying that close to 100% of parents choose to terminate for genetic abnormalities in places like Iceland. Do you think that makes that termination morally and ethically right? There has been a lot in human history that was done universally that we now recognize as abhorrent. Personally I do not think it is a good thing for us as a society to eliminate all children with genetic abnormalities routinely.

I'm not concerned with other people's morals and ethics.

I have a dear friend with a severely disabled child whose disorder is rare enough to not be diagnosed in utero with routinely offered tests. The child will never develop cognitively, eat without a tube, talk, or walk unassisted. My friend, who is lucky enough to be UMC and highly educated, went to hell and back coping with this, and arranging the necessary medical and childcare support for the child. The family's financial position has been altered forever. The mother now also has significant depression due to this.

She is 100% clear that had she known ahead of time, she'd 100% terminate. And in fact when she had gathered enough courage to have another child, she had the pregnancy checked up and down, and was again 100% clear that in case of any issues, she'd terminate without a second thought.

So, the feelings of someone who is actually living through this situation is good enough for me. It would be the height of arrogance for anyone to tell her, well, that's how your cookie crumbled, live with it! No termination for you!

It is interesting here that you do not once mention or appear to care about whether the disabled child values her own life. Your perspective is only that of the adult.

DP. I have a special needs child who routinely expresses that life isn’t enjoyable when you aren’t like anyone else, you can’t do what most other people can, and you feel inferior. We’ve done all the things: child sees a psychiatrist and a therapist and is medicated for depression. I do everything I can to boost child’s self esteem, but child is adamant that the world would be better off if there was a way to prevent special needs people from being born. It breaks my heart because dc’s life is actually pretty good and I don’t share their outlook — but I’m not living with the same challenges dc is.

People should only make decisions for themselves because, obviously, we are not all on the same page. We don’t all have the same spiritual beliefs, ethical concerns, life experience, world view, security, resources, support, resilience and perseverance. I trust women to make the right choices for themselves and their offspring.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is absolutely true that the eugenics movement was a liberal progressive movement (using today’s political terms), but there were plenty of conservatives who also actively promoted the movement. Although its roots were in the liberal progressives, and the thought leadership was in that group, it was enthusiastically embraced by conservatives. In other words, while it is true Sanger was a racist who specifically targeted Black women, she was hardly alone and had plenty of conservatives along with her.

In short, yes, we have a very ugly history of eugenics and yes, the abortion rights movement is part of that, but not just that movement.

I’m curious about the person who keeps saying that close to 100% of parents choose to terminate for genetic abnormalities in places like Iceland. Do you think that makes that termination morally and ethically right? There has been a lot in human history that was done universally that we now recognize as abhorrent. Personally I do not think it is a good thing for us as a society to eliminate all children with genetic abnormalities routinely.

I'm not concerned with other people's morals and ethics.

I have a dear friend with a severely disabled child whose disorder is rare enough to not be diagnosed in utero with routinely offered tests. The child will never develop cognitively, eat without a tube, talk, or walk unassisted. My friend, who is lucky enough to be UMC and highly educated, went to hell and back coping with this, and arranging the necessary medical and childcare support for the child. The family's financial position has been altered forever. The mother now also has significant depression due to this.

She is 100% clear that had she known ahead of time, she'd 100% terminate. And in fact when she had gathered enough courage to have another child, she had the pregnancy checked up and down, and was again 100% clear that in case of any issues, she'd terminate without a second thought.

So, the feelings of someone who is actually living through this situation is good enough for me. It would be the height of arrogance for anyone to tell her, well, that's how your cookie crumbled, live with it! No termination for you!

It is interesting here that you do not once mention or appear to care about whether the disabled child values her own life. Your perspective is only that of the adult.

DP. I have a special needs child who routinely expresses that life isn’t enjoyable when you aren’t like anyone else, you can’t do what most other people can, and you feel inferior. We’ve done all the things: child sees a psychiatrist and a therapist and is medicated for depression. I do everything I can to boost child’s self esteem, but child is adamant that the world would be better off if there was a way to prevent special needs people from being born. It breaks my heart because dc’s life is actually pretty good and I don’t share their outlook — but I’m not living with the same challenges dc is.

People should only make decisions for themselves because, obviously, we are not all on the same page. We don’t all have the same spiritual beliefs, ethical concerns, life experience, world view, security, resources, support, resilience and perseverance. I trust women to make the right choices for themselves and their offspring.

Even if those choices mean no child like yours will be born?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is absolutely true that the eugenics movement was a liberal progressive movement (using today’s political terms), but there were plenty of conservatives who also actively promoted the movement. Although its roots were in the liberal progressives, and the thought leadership was in that group, it was enthusiastically embraced by conservatives. In other words, while it is true Sanger was a racist who specifically targeted Black women, she was hardly alone and had plenty of conservatives along with her.

In short, yes, we have a very ugly history of eugenics and yes, the abortion rights movement is part of that, but not just that movement.

I’m curious about the person who keeps saying that close to 100% of parents choose to terminate for genetic abnormalities in places like Iceland. Do you think that makes that termination morally and ethically right? There has been a lot in human history that was done universally that we now recognize as abhorrent. Personally I do not think it is a good thing for us as a society to eliminate all children with genetic abnormalities routinely.

I'm not concerned with other people's morals and ethics.

I have a dear friend with a severely disabled child whose disorder is rare enough to not be diagnosed in utero with routinely offered tests. The child will never develop cognitively, eat without a tube, talk, or walk unassisted. My friend, who is lucky enough to be UMC and highly educated, went to hell and back coping with this, and arranging the necessary medical and childcare support for the child. The family's financial position has been altered forever. The mother now also has significant depression due to this.

She is 100% clear that had she known ahead of time, she'd 100% terminate. And in fact when she had gathered enough courage to have another child, she had the pregnancy checked up and down, and was again 100% clear that in case of any issues, she'd terminate without a second thought.

So, the feelings of someone who is actually living through this situation is good enough for me. It would be the height of arrogance for anyone to tell her, well, that's how your cookie crumbled, live with it! No termination for you!

It is interesting here that you do not once mention or appear to care about whether the disabled child values her own life. Your perspective is only that of the adult.

DP. I have a special needs child who routinely expresses that life isn’t enjoyable when you aren’t like anyone else, you can’t do what most other people can, and you feel inferior. We’ve done all the things: child sees a psychiatrist and a therapist and is medicated for depression. I do everything I can to boost child’s self esteem, but child is adamant that the world would be better off if there was a way to prevent special needs people from being born. It breaks my heart because dc’s life is actually pretty good and I don’t share their outlook — but I’m not living with the same challenges dc is.

People should only make decisions for themselves because, obviously, we are not all on the same page. We don’t all have the same spiritual beliefs, ethical concerns, life experience, world view, security, resources, support, resilience and perseverance. I trust women to make the right choices for themselves and their offspring.

Even if those choices mean no child like yours will be born?

All of these choices are private individual decisions. They have nothing to do with you.

[Anonymous]

If Trump wins there will be tens of thousands more babies born every year. Another 50,000 children ten years from now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is absolutely true that the eugenics movement was a liberal progressive movement (using today’s political terms), but there were plenty of conservatives who also actively promoted the movement. Although its roots were in the liberal progressives, and the thought leadership was in that group, it was enthusiastically embraced by conservatives. In other words, while it is true Sanger was a racist who specifically targeted Black women, she was hardly alone and had plenty of conservatives along with her.

In short, yes, we have a very ugly history of eugenics and yes, the abortion rights movement is part of that, but not just that movement.

I’m curious about the person who keeps saying that close to 100% of parents choose to terminate for genetic abnormalities in places like Iceland. Do you think that makes that termination morally and ethically right? There has been a lot in human history that was done universally that we now recognize as abhorrent. Personally I do not think it is a good thing for us as a society to eliminate all children with genetic abnormalities routinely.

I'm not concerned with other people's morals and ethics.

I have a dear friend with a severely disabled child whose disorder is rare enough to not be diagnosed in utero with routinely offered tests. The child will never develop cognitively, eat without a tube, talk, or walk unassisted. My friend, who is lucky enough to be UMC and highly educated, went to hell and back coping with this, and arranging the necessary medical and childcare support for the child. The family's financial position has been altered forever. The mother now also has significant depression due to this.

She is 100% clear that had she known ahead of time, she'd 100% terminate. And in fact when she had gathered enough courage to have another child, she had the pregnancy checked up and down, and was again 100% clear that in case of any issues, she'd terminate without a second thought.

So, the feelings of someone who is actually living through this situation is good enough for me. It would be the height of arrogance for anyone to tell her, well, that's how your cookie crumbled, live with it! No termination for you!

It is interesting here that you do not once mention or appear to care about whether the disabled child values her own life. Your perspective is only that of the adult.

DP. I have a special needs child who routinely expresses that life isn’t enjoyable when you aren’t like anyone else, you can’t do what most other people can, and you feel inferior. We’ve done all the things: child sees a psychiatrist and a therapist and is medicated for depression. I do everything I can to boost child’s self esteem, but child is adamant that the world would be better off if there was a way to prevent special needs people from being born. It breaks my heart because dc’s life is actually pretty good and I don’t share their outlook — but I’m not living with the same challenges dc is.

People should only make decisions for themselves because, obviously, we are not all on the same page. We don’t all have the same spiritual beliefs, ethical concerns, life experience, world view, security, resources, support, resilience and perseverance. I trust women to make the right choices for themselves and their offspring.

Your last line is just such a cop out. We say these things but it’s not true. That’s like saying child abusers can’t exist unless they are men. Women to can make poor and yes unethical choices “for themselves and their offspring”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is absolutely true that the eugenics movement was a liberal progressive movement (using today’s political terms), but there were plenty of conservatives who also actively promoted the movement. Although its roots were in the liberal progressives, and the thought leadership was in that group, it was enthusiastically embraced by conservatives. In other words, while it is true Sanger was a racist who specifically targeted Black women, she was hardly alone and had plenty of conservatives along with her.

In short, yes, we have a very ugly history of eugenics and yes, the abortion rights movement is part of that, but not just that movement.

I’m curious about the person who keeps saying that close to 100% of parents choose to terminate for genetic abnormalities in places like Iceland. Do you think that makes that termination morally and ethically right? There has been a lot in human history that was done universally that we now recognize as abhorrent. Personally I do not think it is a good thing for us as a society to eliminate all children with genetic abnormalities routinely.

I'm not concerned with other people's morals and ethics.

I have a dear friend with a severely disabled child whose disorder is rare enough to not be diagnosed in utero with routinely offered tests. The child will never develop cognitively, eat without a tube, talk, or walk unassisted. My friend, who is lucky enough to be UMC and highly educated, went to hell and back coping with this, and arranging the necessary medical and childcare support for the child. The family's financial position has been altered forever. The mother now also has significant depression due to this.

She is 100% clear that had she known ahead of time, she'd 100% terminate. And in fact when she had gathered enough courage to have another child, she had the pregnancy checked up and down, and was again 100% clear that in case of any issues, she'd terminate without a second thought.

So, the feelings of someone who is actually living through this situation is good enough for me. It would be the height of arrogance for anyone to tell her, well, that's how your cookie crumbled, live with it! No termination for you!

It is interesting here that you do not once mention or appear to care about whether the disabled child values her own life. Your perspective is only that of the adult.

DP. I have a special needs child who routinely expresses that life isn’t enjoyable when you aren’t like anyone else, you can’t do what most other people can, and you feel inferior. We’ve done all the things: child sees a psychiatrist and a therapist and is medicated for depression. I do everything I can to boost child’s self esteem, but child is adamant that the world would be better off if there was a way to prevent special needs people from being born. It breaks my heart because dc’s life is actually pretty good and I don’t share their outlook — but I’m not living with the same challenges dc is.

People should only make decisions for themselves because, obviously, we are not all on the same page. We don’t all have the same spiritual beliefs, ethical concerns, life experience, world view, security, resources, support, resilience and perseverance. I trust women to make the right choices for themselves and their offspring.

Even if those choices mean no child like yours will be born?

All of these choices are private individual decisions. They have nothing to do with you.

Nope.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is absolutely true that the eugenics movement was a liberal progressive movement (using today’s political terms), but there were plenty of conservatives who also actively promoted the movement. Although its roots were in the liberal progressives, and the thought leadership was in that group, it was enthusiastically embraced by conservatives. In other words, while it is true Sanger was a racist who specifically targeted Black women, she was hardly alone and had plenty of conservatives along with her.

In short, yes, we have a very ugly history of eugenics and yes, the abortion rights movement is part of that, but not just that movement.

I’m curious about the person who keeps saying that close to 100% of parents choose to terminate for genetic abnormalities in places like Iceland. Do you think that makes that termination morally and ethically right? There has been a lot in human history that was done universally that we now recognize as abhorrent. Personally I do not think it is a good thing for us as a society to eliminate all children with genetic abnormalities routinely.

I'm not concerned with other people's morals and ethics.

I have a dear friend with a severely disabled child whose disorder is rare enough to not be diagnosed in utero with routinely offered tests. The child will never develop cognitively, eat without a tube, talk, or walk unassisted. My friend, who is lucky enough to be UMC and highly educated, went to hell and back coping with this, and arranging the necessary medical and childcare support for the child. The family's financial position has been altered forever. The mother now also has significant depression due to this.

She is 100% clear that had she known ahead of time, she'd 100% terminate. And in fact when she had gathered enough courage to have another child, she had the pregnancy checked up and down, and was again 100% clear that in case of any issues, she'd terminate without a second thought.

So, the feelings of someone who is actually living through this situation is good enough for me. It would be the height of arrogance for anyone to tell her, well, that's how your cookie crumbled, live with it! No termination for you!

It is interesting here that you do not once mention or appear to care about whether the disabled child values her own life. Your perspective is only that of the adult.

DP. I have a special needs child who routinely expresses that life isn’t enjoyable when you aren’t like anyone else, you can’t do what most other people can, and you feel inferior. We’ve done all the things: child sees a psychiatrist and a therapist and is medicated for depression. I do everything I can to boost child’s self esteem, but child is adamant that the world would be better off if there was a way to prevent special needs people from being born. It breaks my heart because dc’s life is actually pretty good and I don’t share their outlook — but I’m not living with the same challenges dc is.

People should only make decisions for themselves because, obviously, we are not all on the same page. We don’t all have the same spiritual beliefs, ethical concerns, life experience, world view, security, resources, support, resilience and perseverance. I trust women to make the right choices for themselves and their offspring.

Even if those choices mean no child like yours will be born?

All of these choices are private individual decisions. They have nothing to do with you.

Nope.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is absolutely true that the eugenics movement was a liberal progressive movement (using today’s political terms), but there were plenty of conservatives who also actively promoted the movement. Although its roots were in the liberal progressives, and the thought leadership was in that group, it was enthusiastically embraced by conservatives. In other words, while it is true Sanger was a racist who specifically targeted Black women, she was hardly alone and had plenty of conservatives along with her.

In short, yes, we have a very ugly history of eugenics and yes, the abortion rights movement is part of that, but not just that movement.

I’m curious about the person who keeps saying that close to 100% of parents choose to terminate for genetic abnormalities in places like Iceland. Do you think that makes that termination morally and ethically right? There has been a lot in human history that was done universally that we now recognize as abhorrent. Personally I do not think it is a good thing for us as a society to eliminate all children with genetic abnormalities routinely.

I'm not concerned with other people's morals and ethics.

I have a dear friend with a severely disabled child whose disorder is rare enough to not be diagnosed in utero with routinely offered tests. The child will never develop cognitively, eat without a tube, talk, or walk unassisted. My friend, who is lucky enough to be UMC and highly educated, went to hell and back coping with this, and arranging the necessary medical and childcare support for the child. The family's financial position has been altered forever. The mother now also has significant depression due to this.

She is 100% clear that had she known ahead of time, she'd 100% terminate. And in fact when she had gathered enough courage to have another child, she had the pregnancy checked up and down, and was again 100% clear that in case of any issues, she'd terminate without a second thought.

So, the feelings of someone who is actually living through this situation is good enough for me. It would be the height of arrogance for anyone to tell her, well, that's how your cookie crumbled, live with it! No termination for you!

It is interesting here that you do not once mention or appear to care about whether the disabled child values her own life. Your perspective is only that of the adult.

DP. I have a special needs child who routinely expresses that life isn’t enjoyable when you aren’t like anyone else, you can’t do what most other people can, and you feel inferior. We’ve done all the things: child sees a psychiatrist and a therapist and is medicated for depression. I do everything I can to boost child’s self esteem, but child is adamant that the world would be better off if there was a way to prevent special needs people from being born. It breaks my heart because dc’s life is actually pretty good and I don’t share their outlook — but I’m not living with the same challenges dc is.

People should only make decisions for themselves because, obviously, we are not all on the same page. We don’t all have the same spiritual beliefs, ethical concerns, life experience, world view, security, resources, support, resilience and perseverance. I trust women to make the right choices for themselves and their offspring.

Even if those choices mean no child like yours will be born?

All of these choices are private individual decisions. They have nothing to do with you.

Nope.

If I ever try to tell you what to do with one of your pregnancies you tell me to go mind my own damn business and that goes for anyone that tries to interfere in any person's pregnancy decisions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do you not have daughters? Sisters? Nieces? What will you say to them when they need a D&C because they had a miscarriage and aren't able to get one and go into septic shock? What happens when their fallopian tube ruptures due to an ectopic pregnancy and they start bleeding internally? Does nobody think about the ramifications of their actions until it affects them individually? Southern states are trying to ban abortions in all instances - rape, incest, health of the mother. Why would you let your daughters, yourself, your nieces, your sisters, go through such pain? HOW IS THIS NOT IMPORTANT TO YOU!?! Why is your money more important than your health?

I would just tell them to be thankful that I didn't abort them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If Trump wins there will be tens of thousands more babies born every year. Another 50,000 children ten years from now.

Nope.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is absolutely true that the eugenics movement was a liberal progressive movement (using today’s political terms), but there were plenty of conservatives who also actively promoted the movement. Although its roots were in the liberal progressives, and the thought leadership was in that group, it was enthusiastically embraced by conservatives. In other words, while it is true Sanger was a racist who specifically targeted Black women, she was hardly alone and had plenty of conservatives along with her.

In short, yes, we have a very ugly history of eugenics and yes, the abortion rights movement is part of that, but not just that movement.

I’m curious about the person who keeps saying that close to 100% of parents choose to terminate for genetic abnormalities in places like Iceland. Do you think that makes that termination morally and ethically right? There has been a lot in human history that was done universally that we now recognize as abhorrent. Personally I do not think it is a good thing for us as a society to eliminate all children with genetic abnormalities routinely.

I'm not concerned with other people's morals and ethics.

I have a dear friend with a severely disabled child whose disorder is rare enough to not be diagnosed in utero with routinely offered tests. The child will never develop cognitively, eat without a tube, talk, or walk unassisted. My friend, who is lucky enough to be UMC and highly educated, went to hell and back coping with this, and arranging the necessary medical and childcare support for the child. The family's financial position has been altered forever. The mother now also has significant depression due to this.

She is 100% clear that had she known ahead of time, she'd 100% terminate. And in fact when she had gathered enough courage to have another child, she had the pregnancy checked up and down, and was again 100% clear that in case of any issues, she'd terminate without a second thought.

So, the feelings of someone who is actually living through this situation is good enough for me. It would be the height of arrogance for anyone to tell her, well, that's how your cookie crumbled, live with it! No termination for you!

It is interesting here that you do not once mention or appear to care about whether the disabled child values her own life. Your perspective is only that of the adult.

DP. I have a special needs child who routinely expresses that life isn’t enjoyable when you aren’t like anyone else, you can’t do what most other people can, and you feel inferior. We’ve done all the things: child sees a psychiatrist and a therapist and is medicated for depression. I do everything I can to boost child’s self esteem, but child is adamant that the world would be better off if there was a way to prevent special needs people from being born. It breaks my heart because dc’s life is actually pretty good and I don’t share their outlook — but I’m not living with the same challenges dc is.

People should only make decisions for themselves because, obviously, we are not all on the same page. We don’t all have the same spiritual beliefs, ethical concerns, life experience, world view, security, resources, support, resilience and perseverance. I trust women to make the right choices for themselves and their offspring.

Even if those choices mean no child like yours will be born?

Obviously all women wouldn’t make the same choice.

[Anonymous]

Wow the forced birthers are really proud of how much they hate women, aren’t they? Just over and over telling them that they don’t matter, their life doesn’t matter, the lives of their existing children don’t matter, their plans don’t matter… It’s almost like forced birthers don’t think women are people at all.