Reply to Abortion messaging needs to change

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Abortion messaging needs to change"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]A 16-week abortion ban is a very smart compromise that will get support from both sides. Currently, only 15 of 193 U.N. Member Countries allow elective abortion after the 15th week of pregnancy, so the U.S. is a major outlier where many states still allow elective abortion until birth.[/quote]

So you believe  woman who discovers a catastrophic condition at 17 weeks for either herself or her fetus should be forced to carry it to 40 weeks? Is that what you are saying?  Because that’s what I hear you say. [/quote]

Who is discovering a ‘catastrophic’ condition at 17 weeks?

If you’ve had a baby in the last twenty years, you’d have known that all ‘catastrophic’ diagnoses are discoverable in the first 15 weeks now with current, widely available prenatal care.[/quote]

Is this poster stupid or a liar?
What do we think?
[/quote]
A liar.

Someone upthread was talking about all the very many elective third trimester abortions she claimed were happening all the time (spoiler alert: they were not). A few of the women in the study found out at the 20 week ultrasound that their fetus had problems, but the extent was not revealed until a scan at 28 weeks, at which point Miss “All ‘catastrophic’ diagnoses” up there would have shamed the woman for having had an abortion.

Maybe the forced birthers need to change their messaging. Anyone vile enough to refer to diagnoses as “catastrophic” as if that’s a joke and a loop hole for sluts to have abortions at 40 works need to… well what goes around comes around.[/quote]  Yes there are lots of medical reasons that make abortion necessary.  However, every thread on this forum eventually has someone saying it is inconvenient for some women to have a child.  This is why most abortions appen.  […][/quote]
Have you ever googled the Turnaway Study? When you say “inconvenient” I think what you mean is “interferes with my nail appointments” but what it actually means is “my boyfriend is getting controlling.” “I finally recovered from the birth of my third; I cannot go through that again so soon.” “I have two years left to my degree; I am not going back to a minimum wage job.” “I’m sixteen.” Women who are denied abortions end up poorer, less educated more likely to be in violent relationships. In short when a woman knows she doesn’t want to be pregnant and give birth, it’s for a good reason, even if [i]you[/i] would reduce it to “convenience.”
[/quote]

I think in these circumstances the state has an interest in considering the life of the baby.[/quote]

And the woman who is a living breathing person has her own interests that are above and beyond big government inteference. It’s a matter of liberty. [/quote]
Altogether: “women aren’t people in the GOP.”[/quote]

Women are pro life too.  You just disagree with them.[/quote]

Pro-life? The people saying quick get an abortion at 14 weeks even if a second opinion two weeks later at 16 weeks could show a perfectly healthy baby, those are the pro life people?[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics