Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make abortion a federal right until 16 weeks. If states want more than that, that’s their issue and they can decide for the voters of that state. But everyone gets 16 weeks, minimum.

Problem solved.

Not even close to problem solved. I had a friend whose baby died at 22 weeks. There was no heartbeat.

If 16 weeks was the law she would have been required to keep the dead baby inside her until the decomposition caused sepsis and posed an immediate risk to her life. That’s barbaric.

People who advocate for a ban after 16 weeks either don't know anything about why women have abortions, or they don't care.

We certainly know why they have them before 16 weeks though.

Yes, we do. These reasons include:

-having a child would interfere with the woman's education, work, or ability to care for dependents
-the woman can't afford a baby now
-the woman does not want to be a single mother or is having relationship problems
-the woman has completed her childbearing and does not want more children
-the woman is not ready to have a child

Now, you may not think those are good reasons, but unless it's your uterus, your opinion is irrelevant.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make abortion a federal right until 16 weeks. If states want more than that, that’s their issue and they can decide for the voters of that state. But everyone gets 16 weeks, minimum.

Problem solved.

Not even close to problem solved. I had a friend whose baby died at 22 weeks. There was no heartbeat.

If 16 weeks was the law she would have been required to keep the dead baby inside her until the decomposition caused sepsis and posed an immediate risk to her life. That’s barbaric.

People who advocate for a ban after 16 weeks either don't know anything about why women have abortions, or they don't care.

We certainly know why they have them before 16 weeks though.

Yes, we do. These reasons include:

-having a child would interfere with the woman's education, work, or ability to care for dependents
-the woman can't afford a baby now
-the woman does not want to be a single mother or is having relationship problems
-the woman has completed her childbearing and does not want more children
-the woman is not ready to have a child

Now, you may not think those are good reasons, but unless it's your uterus, your opinion is irrelevant.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make abortion a federal right until 16 weeks. If states want more than that, that’s their issue and they can decide for the voters of that state. But everyone gets 16 weeks, minimum.

Problem solved.

Not even close to problem solved. I had a friend whose baby died at 22 weeks. There was no heartbeat.

If 16 weeks was the law she would have been required to keep the dead baby inside her until the decomposition caused sepsis and posed an immediate risk to her life. That’s barbaric.

People who advocate for a ban after 16 weeks either don't know anything about why women have abortions, or they don't care.

We certainly know why they have them before 16 weeks though.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make abortion a federal right until 16 weeks. If states want more than that, that’s their issue and they can decide for the voters of that state. But everyone gets 16 weeks, minimum.

Problem solved.

Not even close to problem solved. I had a friend whose baby died at 22 weeks. There was no heartbeat.

If 16 weeks was the law she would have been required to keep the dead baby inside her until the decomposition caused sepsis and posed an immediate risk to her life. That’s barbaric.

That is the dumbest post I’ve read here in a long time.

Literally NO ONE is requiring anyone to keep a DEAD baby inside them until it rots.

You. Are. A. Liar.

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:

Anonymous wrote:My first thought about this is everything lives on the internet forever and there's no doubt in my mind this will be a regret for these boys in the future.

Why?

I wouldn’t hire them

That’s because you won’t have the ability to. You will work for them.

Sounds like the O'Connell kids are back from Richmond, trolling a mommy website during lunch.

You aren't mature/informed enough to have an adult conversation, let alone make healthcare decisions for millions of women.

Never heard that playground retort before. Very original.

How else would you explain the earlier comment that sounds immature even for a HS student? Maybe a MS student?

Calling anyone and everyone immature who has different views and opinions from you doesn’t make them immature. It indicates you are in fact the immature one.

A: this will be a regret for these boys in the future.
B: Why?
A: I wouldn’t hire them
B: That’s because you won’t have the ability to. You will work for them.

That's not a "different view or opinion". That's simply a childish remark.

Not to mention, there are "different" views and there are INVALID ones. These people at these marches have views that are invalid. We're fine to disregard them and ridicule those people for having them.

Keep raging over things and people you can’t control. It’s funny.

Raging all the way to the poll, baby. Vote them neanderthals out.

M’eh, you’d still vote the same exact way even if all abortion up to full term was the law of the land. Let’s not pretend you’d be voting Republican except for abortion. Abortion doesn’t change anything. You’re just an ordinary leftist. You’d vote the same way no matter what.

There is no such thing as "abortion up to full term". At full term, it's delivery.

Ask former Virginia Governor Dr. Ralph “Blackface” Northam (D) about how to perform abortions after the baby has been born.

Or Dr Kermit Gossnell.

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:

Anonymous wrote:My first thought about this is everything lives on the internet forever and there's no doubt in my mind this will be a regret for these boys in the future.

Why?

I wouldn’t hire them

That’s because you won’t have the ability to. You will work for them.

Sounds like the O'Connell kids are back from Richmond, trolling a mommy website during lunch.

You aren't mature/informed enough to have an adult conversation, let alone make healthcare decisions for millions of women.

Never heard that playground retort before. Very original.

How else would you explain the earlier comment that sounds immature even for a HS student? Maybe a MS student?

Calling anyone and everyone immature who has different views and opinions from you doesn’t make them immature. It indicates you are in fact the immature one.

A: this will be a regret for these boys in the future.
B: Why?
A: I wouldn’t hire them
B: That’s because you won’t have the ability to. You will work for them.

That's not a "different view or opinion". That's simply a childish remark.

Not to mention, there are "different" views and there are INVALID ones. These people at these marches have views that are invalid. We're fine to disregard them and ridicule those people for having them.

Keep raging over things and people you can’t control. It’s funny.

Raging all the way to the poll, baby. Vote them neanderthals out.

M’eh, you’d still vote the same exact way even if all abortion up to full term was the law of the land. Let’s not pretend you’d be voting Republican except for abortion. Abortion doesn’t change anything. You’re just an ordinary leftist. You’d vote the same way no matter what.

You're so cute. I've been voting for Democrats for 30 years on issues such as the economy, jobs, education, and climate change, but those are too complicated for you to understand and navigate.

In other words, I was 100% CORRECT about you.

You’ll never vote R, no matter what. Abortion is a meaningless issue. No matter what opinion R’s held on it, you’d still never vote for them. Called it.

This is why they should disregard you and all the other abortion extremists. They have zero to gain trying to get your support, and they alienate their actual voters when they try.

Too bad GOP leadership can’t figure this out.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make abortion a federal right until 16 weeks. If states want more than that, that’s their issue and they can decide for the voters of that state. But everyone gets 16 weeks, minimum.

Problem solved.

Not even close to problem solved. I had a friend whose baby died at 22 weeks. There was no heartbeat.

If 16 weeks was the law she would have been required to keep the dead baby inside her until the decomposition caused sepsis and posed an immediate risk to her life. That’s barbaric.

People who advocate for a ban after 16 weeks either don't know anything about why women have abortions, or they don't care.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make abortion a federal right until 16 weeks. If states want more than that, that’s their issue and they can decide for the voters of that state. But everyone gets 16 weeks, minimum.

Problem solved.

Not even close to problem solved. I had a friend whose baby died at 22 weeks. There was no heartbeat.

If 16 weeks was the law she would have been required to keep the dead baby inside her until the decomposition caused sepsis and posed an immediate risk to her life. That’s barbaric.

Anonymous wrote:Once again the party of tolerance is not tolerating those with different viewpoints. I'm completely disgusted of how you talk about other people. Proud of my governor, proud of these kids marching for life, and will pray for all of you to have a change of heart. All life is sacred from conception to natural death. And yes, I'm an educated, successful women.

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:My first thought about this is everything lives on the internet forever and there's no doubt in my mind this will be a regret for these boys in the future.

Why?

I wouldn’t hire them

That’s because you won’t have the ability to. You will work for them.

Sounds like the O'Connell kids are back from Richmond, trolling a mommy website during lunch.

You aren't mature/informed enough to have an adult conversation, let alone make healthcare decisions for millions of women.

Never heard that playground retort before. Very original.

How else would you explain the earlier comment that sounds immature even for a HS student? Maybe a MS student?

Calling anyone and everyone immature who has different views and opinions from you doesn’t make them immature. It indicates you are in fact the immature one.

A: this will be a regret for these boys in the future.
B: Why?
A: I wouldn’t hire them
B: That’s because you won’t have the ability to. You will work for them.

That's not a "different view or opinion". That's simply a childish remark.

Not to mention, there are "different" views and there are INVALID ones. These people at these marches have views that are invalid. We're fine to disregard them and ridicule those people for having them.

Keep raging over things and people you can’t control. It’s funny.

Raging all the way to the poll, baby. Vote them neanderthals out.

M’eh, you’d still vote the same exact way even if all abortion up to full term was the law of the land. Let’s not pretend you’d be voting Republican except for abortion. Abortion doesn’t change anything. You’re just an ordinary leftist. You’d vote the same way no matter what.

There is no such thing as "abortion up to full term". At full term, it's delivery.

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:My first thought about this is everything lives on the internet forever and there's no doubt in my mind this will be a regret for these boys in the future.

Why?

I wouldn’t hire them

That’s because you won’t have the ability to. You will work for them.

Sounds like the O'Connell kids are back from Richmond, trolling a mommy website during lunch.

You aren't mature/informed enough to have an adult conversation, let alone make healthcare decisions for millions of women.

Never heard that playground retort before. Very original.

How else would you explain the earlier comment that sounds immature even for a HS student? Maybe a MS student?

Calling anyone and everyone immature who has different views and opinions from you doesn’t make them immature. It indicates you are in fact the immature one.

A: this will be a regret for these boys in the future.
B: Why?
A: I wouldn’t hire them
B: That’s because you won’t have the ability to. You will work for them.

That's not a "different view or opinion". That's simply a childish remark.

Not to mention, there are "different" views and there are INVALID ones. These people at these marches have views that are invalid. We're fine to disregard them and ridicule those people for having them.

Keep raging over things and people you can’t control. It’s funny.

Raging all the way to the poll, baby. Vote them neanderthals out.

M’eh, you’d still vote the same exact way even if all abortion up to full term was the law of the land. Let’s not pretend you’d be voting Republican except for abortion. Abortion doesn’t change anything. You’re just an ordinary leftist. You’d vote the same way no matter what.

You're so cute. I've been voting for Democrats for 30 years on issues such as the economy, jobs, education, and climate change, but those are too complicated for you to understand and navigate.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make abortion a federal right until 16 weeks. If states want more than that, that’s their issue and they can decide for the voters of that state. But everyone gets 16 weeks, minimum.

Problem solved.

Not even close to problem solved. I had a friend whose baby died at 22 weeks. There was no heartbeat.

If 16 weeks was the law she would have been required to keep the dead baby inside her until the decomposition caused sepsis and posed an immediate risk to her life. That’s barbaric.

That is not how that works.

That is literally how it is working in TX, OH, FL and other states right now.

No it is not lol. Do people really believe this? Removing a deceased fetus is not an abortion under any of those state's law.

a) you are just wrong b) vague exceptions in the law don't make much of a difference because a doctor isn't going to risk jail time and losing their license just to help a woman who is extremely ill or carrying a dead fetus.

It really isn't vague.

Ohio's law for example (Revised Code 2919.11): "As used in the Revised Code, "abortion" means the purposeful termination of a human pregnancy by any person, including the pregnant woman herself, with an intention other than to produce a live birth or to remove a dead fetus or embryo. Abortion is the practice of medicine or surgery for the purposes of section 4731.41 of the Revised Code." And Florida: "'Abortion' means the termination of human pregnancy with an intention other than to produce a live birth or to remove a dead fetus."

There ARE vague areas of these laws, for example, what constitutes a threat to the mother's health (when the fetus still has a heartbeat), and those are a major problem. But there is no law that is going to require a woman to keep carrying an already deceased fetus to term. Spreading that misinformation helps nobody.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make abortion a federal right until 16 weeks. If states want more than that, that’s their issue and they can decide for the voters of that state. But everyone gets 16 weeks, minimum.

Problem solved.

Not even close to problem solved. I had a friend whose baby died at 22 weeks. There was no heartbeat.

If 16 weeks was the law she would have been required to keep the dead baby inside her until the decomposition caused sepsis and posed an immediate risk to her life. That’s barbaric.

That is not how that works.

That is literally how it is working in TX, OH, FL and other states right now.

No it is not lol. Do people really believe this? Removing a deceased fetus is not an abortion under any of those state's law.

a) you are just wrong b) vague exceptions in the law don't make much of a difference because a doctor isn't going to risk jail time and losing their license just to help a woman who is extremely ill or carrying a dead fetus.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make abortion a federal right until 16 weeks. If states want more than that, that’s their issue and they can decide for the voters of that state. But everyone gets 16 weeks, minimum.

Problem solved.

Not even close to problem solved. I had a friend whose baby died at 22 weeks. There was no heartbeat.

If 16 weeks was the law she would have been required to keep the dead baby inside her until the decomposition caused sepsis and posed an immediate risk to her life. That’s barbaric.

That is not how that works.

That is literally how it is working in TX, OH, FL and other states right now.

No it is not lol. Do people really believe this? Removing a deceased fetus is not an abortion under any of those state's law.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Make abortion a federal right until 16 weeks. If states want more than that, that’s their issue and they can decide for the voters of that state. But everyone gets 16 weeks, minimum.

Problem solved.

Not even close to problem solved. I had a friend whose baby died at 22 weeks. There was no heartbeat.

If 16 weeks was the law she would have been required to keep the dead baby inside her until the decomposition caused sepsis and posed an immediate risk to her life. That’s barbaric.

That is not how that works.

That is literally how it is working in TX, OH, FL and other states right now.

No it is not lol. Do people really believe this? Removing a deceased fetus is not an abortion under any of those state's law.

The process to remove a dead fetus from a woman’s womb is called an abortion. It’s subject to the same laws and regulations as all abortions regardless of the reason for doing it.