Anonymous wrote:
You see, these kinds of cases don't happen. Nobody is trying to keep 10 year old girls pregnant and carrying to term. You know how you know? Because nobody talks about it. Also, you can't talk about it.
Easy peasy.
SCOTT: I mean, our residents are devastated. I mean, they signed up to provide - I'm sorry - they signed up to provide comprehensive health care to women. And they are being told that they can't do that. And I think it will deeply impact how we recruit and retain people to our state.
YOUSRY: That could be trouble for patients in states like Indiana that already have a shortage of providers. One study suggests that nearly half of all rural counties in the U.S. do not have a single hospital with obstetric services. Dr. Scott says it'll also restrict the hands-on training she can offer doctors in abortion and managing miscarriages. Some programs may send residents to states without abortion restrictions, but that could be a logistical nightmare. All of this has given Beatrice Soderholm a lot to think about. Soderholm was certain she wanted to practice in Indiana. But lately, family in Minnesota have asked why she would stay.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Actually the republican politicians said the victim didn’t exist. They screamed for a weekend on Fox News that it was fake news.
And just left it at that.
Democrats hid the identity of the mother until it became clear that the danger was coming from inside the house
Doxxing the mother would dox the identity of the 10 year old victim.
Who needs to be protected from the mother since the rapist was her boyfriend.
Not the topic. And totally irrelevant to whether she was allowed to get an abortion in Ohio. Which she was not.
It’s very relevant, but, I understand, inconvenient for you
DP children should not be sexually abused.
But when that does happen they need to have access to abortion if they become pregnant. Because babies should not be gestating babies.
The forced birthers want the baby to be born. Honestly, they believe the 10 year old is at fault. She was asking for it. It’s part of her punishment for being a slutty 10 year old.
It’s what they believe.
The rapist is at fault, as is the mother who covered for him
Then why did the Indiana AG spending two years and thousands of taxpayer dollars going after the doctor who treated her, who I think we can all agree was neither the rapist nor the mother?
It’s almost like…and stay with me here…they are trying to intimidate and scare doctors from legally treating raped children?
But that can’t be right?
The article above says he sued the doctor for violating her privacy? Not for treating her? Can someone clarify. I have not been following this.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Actually the republican politicians said the victim didn’t exist. They screamed for a weekend on Fox News that it was fake news.
And just left it at that.
Democrats hid the identity of the mother until it became clear that the danger was coming from inside the house
Doxxing the mother would dox the identity of the 10 year old victim.
Who needs to be protected from the mother since the rapist was her boyfriend.
Not the topic. And totally irrelevant to whether she was allowed to get an abortion in Ohio. Which she was not.
It’s very relevant, but, I understand, inconvenient for you
DP children should not be sexually abused.
But when that does happen they need to have access to abortion if they become pregnant. Because babies should not be gestating babies.
The forced birthers want the baby to be born. Honestly, they believe the 10 year old is at fault. She was asking for it. It’s part of her punishment for being a slutty 10 year old.
It’s what they believe.
The rapist is at fault, as is the mother who covered for him
Then why did the Indiana AG spending two years and thousands of taxpayer dollars going after the doctor who treated her, who I think we can all agree was neither the rapist nor the mother?
It’s almost like…and stay with me here…they are trying to intimidate and scare doctors from legally treating raped children?
But that can’t be right?
The article above says he sued the doctor for violating her privacy? Not for treating her? Can someone clarify. I have not been following this.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Actually the republican politicians said the victim didn’t exist. They screamed for a weekend on Fox News that it was fake news.
And just left it at that.
Democrats hid the identity of the mother until it became clear that the danger was coming from inside the house
Doxxing the mother would dox the identity of the 10 year old victim.
Who needs to be protected from the mother since the rapist was her boyfriend.
Not the topic. And totally irrelevant to whether she was allowed to get an abortion in Ohio. Which she was not.
It’s very relevant, but, I understand, inconvenient for you
DP children should not be sexually abused.
But when that does happen they need to have access to abortion if they become pregnant. Because babies should not be gestating babies.
The forced birthers want the baby to be born. Honestly, they believe the 10 year old is at fault. She was asking for it. It’s part of her punishment for being a slutty 10 year old.
It’s what they believe.
The rapist is at fault, as is the mother who covered for him
Then why did the Indiana AG spending two years and thousands of taxpayer dollars going after the doctor who treated her, who I think we can all agree was neither the rapist nor the mother?
It’s almost like…and stay with me here…they are trying to intimidate and scare doctors from legally treating raped children?
But that can’t be right?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Actually the republican politicians said the victim didn’t exist. They screamed for a weekend on Fox News that it was fake news.
And just left it at that.
Democrats hid the identity of the mother until it became clear that the danger was coming from inside the house
Doxxing the mother would dox the identity of the 10 year old victim.
Who needs to be protected from the mother since the rapist was her boyfriend.
Not the topic. And totally irrelevant to whether she was allowed to get an abortion in Ohio. Which she was not.
It’s very relevant, but, I understand, inconvenient for you
DP children should not be sexually abused.
But when that does happen they need to have access to abortion if they become pregnant. Because babies should not be gestating babies.
The forced birthers want the baby to be born. Honestly, they believe the 10 year old is at fault. She was asking for it. It’s part of her punishment for being a slutty 10 year old.
It’s what they believe.
The rapist is at fault, as is the mother who covered for him
Then why did the Indiana AG spending two years and thousands of taxpayer dollars going after the doctor who treated her, who I think we can all agree was neither the rapist nor the mother?
It’s almost like…and stay with me here…they are trying to intimidate and scare doctors from legally treating raped children?
But that can’t be right?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Actually the republican politicians said the victim didn’t exist. They screamed for a weekend on Fox News that it was fake news.
And just left it at that.
Democrats hid the identity of the mother until it became clear that the danger was coming from inside the house
Doxxing the mother would dox the identity of the 10 year old victim.
Who needs to be protected from the mother since the rapist was her boyfriend.
Not the topic. And totally irrelevant to whether she was allowed to get an abortion in Ohio. Which she was not.
It’s very relevant, but, I understand, inconvenient for you
DP children should not be sexually abused.
But when that does happen they need to have access to abortion if they become pregnant. Because babies should not be gestating babies.
The forced birthers want the baby to be born. Honestly, they believe the 10 year old is at fault. She was asking for it. It’s part of her punishment for being a slutty 10 year old.
It’s what they believe.
The rapist is at fault, as is the mother who covered for him
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Does anyone wonder how many little girls have been forced to give birth since the activists judges overturned Roe?
Back when this story was first reported I read that it was at least one preteen pregnancy per month in Ohio (population ~ 11.8 million) alone. Who knows how many have been able to access abortion and how many have been forced to give birth.
That the forced birthers are ready to consign these little girls to the dust heap (or the cemetery) is just disgusting.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Does anyone wonder how many little girls have been forced to give birth since the activists judges overturned Roe?
Back when this story was first reported I read that it was at least one preteen pregnancy per month in Ohio (population ~ 11.8 million) alone. Who knows how many have been able to access abortion and how many have been forced to give birth.