Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How many other countries in the world did people have the constitutional right for an abortion? Ive seen it said the the US was the only one. Is this true?

It has never been a constitutional right. Educate yourself.

Anonymous wrote:How many other countries in the world did people have the constitutional right for an abortion? Ive seen it said the the US was the only one. Is this true?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not me but my sister's friend had an abortion last year in her late 30's . It was a very much wanted pregnancy, but after a heartbreaking prenatal diagnosis they made the difficult choice to terminate.

My very pro-life mother was telling about this and understood why the woman made this choice and supported this choice. I then told her "this is why I support a woman's right to have an abortion." To which my mother told me "This isn't an abortion, This is different." Make it make sense.

Your mom is wrong, which is why I wanted to share my story (op)

Here you go being all nonsensical again OP. Congratulations. Your abortion story wins, okay?

You still don’t get it. TFMR is abortion, and it will go away where abortions are disallowed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not me but my sister's friend had an abortion last year in her late 30's . It was a very much wanted pregnancy, but after a heartbreaking prenatal diagnosis they made the difficult choice to terminate.

My very pro-life mother was telling about this and understood why the woman made this choice and supported this choice. I then told her "this is why I support a woman's right to have an abortion." To which my mother told me "This isn't an abortion, This is different." Make it make sense.

Your mom is wrong, which is why I wanted to share my story (op)

Here you go being all nonsensical again OP. Congratulations. Your abortion story wins, okay?

You still don’t get it. TFMR is abortion, and it will go away where abortions are disallowed.

Which states are outlawing abortion in the case of medical emergencies?

I know the law in Texas, for example, explicitly states, that an abortion may be performed "to avert the woman's death or a serious risk of substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function."

These are similar to provisions in European countries where abortion is forbidden, except for medical reasons, beyond the first trimester (or somewhat later, but in most countries not beyond 12-14 weeks). Even in Poland, where abortions are completely forbidden and (the media I've seen confirms) ob/gyns are more hesitant to provide them even though there is a provision for medical emergencies, maternal mortality is quite low (indicating that these procedures are being performed when needed).

I think some people are genuinely fearful and panicked about this issue, and I'd like to reassure them that this is very likely just a pro-choice talking point. If you are pro-choice, you know that even if you could be reassured that in 100% of medical emergencies (and even 100% of cases of rape and incest) we could guarantee that women would have access to abortion, that is not your goal. I am not saying that's a bad thing-- I think, for example, the rules in much of Europe where abortion can be obtained for any reason within the first trimester and for medical reasons beyond then, are reasonable. But part of the reason we are having this debate is because a very small minority of pro-choice activists in the U.S. aren't willing to compromise on a position most people support because they want abortion to be legal, with zero restrictions, up until the moment a woman gives birth. They have to use other arguments-- "If we don't allow this, women will be denied abortions even when there is a clear medical reason!"-- because this position appears so radical even to most people who consider themselves pro-choice.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not me but my sister's friend had an abortion last year in her late 30's . It was a very much wanted pregnancy, but after a heartbreaking prenatal diagnosis they made the difficult choice to terminate.

My very pro-life mother was telling about this and understood why the woman made this choice and supported this choice. I then told her "this is why I support a woman's right to have an abortion." To which my mother told me "This isn't an abortion, This is different." Make it make sense.

Your mom is wrong, which is why I wanted to share my story (op)

Here you go being all nonsensical again OP. Congratulations. Your abortion story wins, okay?

You still don’t get it. TFMR is abortion, and it will go away where abortions are disallowed.

Which states are outlawing abortion in the case of medical emergencies?

I know the law in Texas, for example, explicitly states, that an abortion may be performed "to avert the woman's death or a serious risk of substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function."

These are similar to provisions in European countries where abortion is forbidden, except for medical reasons, beyond the first trimester (or somewhat later, but in most countries not beyond 12-14 weeks). Even in Poland, where abortions are completely forbidden and (the media I've seen confirms) ob/gyns are more hesitant to provide them even though there is a provision for medical emergencies, maternal mortality is quite low (indicating that these procedures are being performed when needed).

I think some people are genuinely fearful and panicked about this issue, and I'd like to reassure them that this is very likely just a pro-choice talking point. If you are pro-choice, you know that even if you could be reassured that in 100% of medical emergencies (and even 100% of cases of rape and incest) we could guarantee that women would have access to abortion, that is not your goal. I am not saying that's a bad thing-- I think, for example, the rules in much of Europe where abortion can be obtained for any reason within the first trimester and for medical reasons beyond then, are reasonable. But part of the reason we are having this debate is because a very small minority of pro-choice activists in the U.S. aren't willing to compromise on a position most people support because they want abortion to be legal, with zero restrictions, up until the moment a woman gives birth. They have to use other arguments-- "If we don't allow this, women will be denied abortions even when there is a clear medical reason!"-- because this position appears so radical even to most people who consider themselves pro-choice.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not me but my sister's friend had an abortion last year in her late 30's . It was a very much wanted pregnancy, but after a heartbreaking prenatal diagnosis they made the difficult choice to terminate.

My very pro-life mother was telling about this and understood why the woman made this choice and supported this choice. I then told her "this is why I support a woman's right to have an abortion." To which my mother told me "This isn't an abortion, This is different." Make it make sense.

Your mom is wrong, which is why I wanted to share my story (op)

Here you go being all nonsensical again OP. Congratulations. Your abortion story wins, okay?

You still don’t get it. TFMR is abortion, and it will go away where abortions are disallowed.

Which states are outlawing abortion in the case of medical emergencies?

I know the law in Texas, for example, explicitly states, that an abortion may be performed "to avert the woman's death or a serious risk of substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function."

These are similar to provisions in European countries where abortion is forbidden, except for medical reasons, beyond the first trimester (or somewhat later, but in most countries not beyond 12-14 weeks). Even in Poland, where abortions are completely forbidden and (the media I've seen confirms) ob/gyns are more hesitant to provide them even though there is a provision for medical emergencies, maternal mortality is quite low (indicating that these procedures are being performed when needed).

I think some people are genuinely fearful and panicked about this issue, and I'd like to reassure them that this is very likely just a pro-choice talking point. If you are pro-choice, you know that even if you could be reassured that in 100% of medical emergencies (and even 100% of cases of rape and incest) we could guarantee that women would have access to abortion, that is not your goal. I am not saying that's a bad thing-- I think, for example, the rules in much of Europe where abortion can be obtained for any reason within the first trimester and for medical reasons beyond then, are reasonable. But part of the reason we are having this debate is because a very small minority of pro-choice activists in the U.S. aren't willing to compromise on a position most people support because they want abortion to be legal, with zero restrictions, up until the moment a woman gives birth. They have to use other arguments-- "If we don't allow this, women will be denied abortions even when there is a clear medical reason!"-- because this position appears so radical even to most people who consider themselves pro-choice.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not me but my sister's friend had an abortion last year in her late 30's . It was a very much wanted pregnancy, but after a heartbreaking prenatal diagnosis they made the difficult choice to terminate.

My very pro-life mother was telling about this and understood why the woman made this choice and supported this choice. I then told her "this is why I support a woman's right to have an abortion." To which my mother told me "This isn't an abortion, This is different." Make it make sense.

Your mom is wrong, which is why I wanted to share my story (op)

Here you go being all nonsensical again OP. Congratulations. Your abortion story wins, okay?

You still don’t get it. TFMR is abortion, and it will go away where abortions are disallowed.

Which states are outlawing abortion in the case of medical emergencies?

I know the law in Texas, for example, explicitly states, that an abortion may be performed "to avert the woman's death or a serious risk of substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function."

These are similar to provisions in European countries where abortion is forbidden, except for medical reasons, beyond the first trimester (or somewhat later, but in most countries not beyond 12-14 weeks). Even in Poland, where abortions are completely forbidden and (the media I've seen confirms) ob/gyns are more hesitant to provide them even though there is a provision for medical emergencies, maternal mortality is quite low (indicating that these procedures are being performed when needed).

I think some people are genuinely fearful and panicked about this issue, and I'd like to reassure them that this is very likely just a pro-choice talking point. If you are pro-choice, you know that even if you could be reassured that in 100% of medical emergencies (and even 100% of cases of rape and incest) we could guarantee that women would have access to abortion, that is not your goal. I am not saying that's a bad thing-- I think, for example, the rules in much of Europe where abortion can be obtained for any reason within the first trimester and for medical reasons beyond then, are reasonable. But part of the reason we are having this debate is because a very small minority of pro-choice activists in the U.S. aren't willing to compromise on a position most people support because they want abortion to be legal, with zero restrictions, up until the moment a woman gives birth. They have to use other arguments-- "If we don't allow this, women will be denied abortions even when there is a clear medical reason!"-- because this position appears so radical even to most people who consider themselves pro-choice.

As a lawyer I can tell you that “health exception” is intended to make women wait until they are almost dead to get an abortion, and some will die. and it completely negates the ability of a woman to make her own health decisions. for example, if you had a prior pregnancy with placebta accreta or previa, or severe pre-eclampsia, and you did not want to take the risk again? no dice, you have to stay pregnant until you are almost dead. Or if you have cancer and want to get treatment? Sorry. Or if you have a heart condition and doctor says “you have a 90% of dying if you stay pregnant. You’re stable now in 1st tri, but greater burden of 3rd could kill you.” Still no abortion!

Anonymous wrote:Old boomers and genx that aren't even of child birth age are the most vocal

All younger folks are fine and responsible so they are in BC

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not me but my sister's friend had an abortion last year in her late 30's . It was a very much wanted pregnancy, but after a heartbreaking prenatal diagnosis they made the difficult choice to terminate.

My very pro-life mother was telling about this and understood why the woman made this choice and supported this choice. I then told her "this is why I support a woman's right to have an abortion." To which my mother told me "This isn't an abortion, This is different." Make it make sense.

Your mom is wrong, which is why I wanted to share my story (op)

Here you go being all nonsensical again OP. Congratulations. Your abortion story wins, okay?

You still don’t get it. TFMR is abortion, and it will go away where abortions are disallowed.

Which states are outlawing abortion in the case of medical emergencies?

I know the law in Texas, for example, explicitly states, that an abortion may be performed "to avert the woman's death or a serious risk of substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function."

These are similar to provisions in European countries where abortion is forbidden, except for medical reasons, beyond the first trimester (or somewhat later, but in most countries not beyond 12-14 weeks). Even in Poland, where abortions are completely forbidden and (the media I've seen confirms) ob/gyns are more hesitant to provide them even though there is a provision for medical emergencies, maternal mortality is quite low (indicating that these procedures are being performed when needed).

I think some people are genuinely fearful and panicked about this issue, and I'd like to reassure them that this is very likely just a pro-choice talking point. If you are pro-choice, you know that even if you could be reassured that in 100% of medical emergencies (and even 100% of cases of rape and incest) we could guarantee that women would have access to abortion, that is not your goal. I am not saying that's a bad thing-- I think, for example, the rules in much of Europe where abortion can be obtained for any reason within the first trimester and for medical reasons beyond then, are reasonable. But part of the reason we are having this debate is because a very small minority of pro-choice activists in the U.S. aren't willing to compromise on a position most people support because they want abortion to be legal, with zero restrictions, up until the moment a woman gives birth. They have to use other arguments-- "If we don't allow this, women will be denied abortions even when there is a clear medical reason!"-- because this position appears so radical even to most people who consider themselves pro-choice.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not me but my sister's friend had an abortion last year in her late 30's . It was a very much wanted pregnancy, but after a heartbreaking prenatal diagnosis they made the difficult choice to terminate.

My very pro-life mother was telling about this and understood why the woman made this choice and supported this choice. I then told her "this is why I support a woman's right to have an abortion." To which my mother told me "This isn't an abortion, This is different." Make it make sense.

Your mom is wrong, which is why I wanted to share my story (op)

Here you go being all nonsensical again OP. Congratulations. Your abortion story wins, okay?

You still don’t get it. TFMR is abortion, and it will go away where abortions are disallowed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not me but my sister's friend had an abortion last year in her late 30's . It was a very much wanted pregnancy, but after a heartbreaking prenatal diagnosis they made the difficult choice to terminate.

My very pro-life mother was telling about this and understood why the woman made this choice and supported this choice. I then told her "this is why I support a woman's right to have an abortion." To which my mother told me "This isn't an abortion, This is different." Make it make sense.

Your mom is wrong, which is why I wanted to share my story (op)

Here you go being all nonsensical again OP. Congratulations. Your abortion story wins, okay?

Anonymous wrote:Not me but my sister's friend had an abortion last year in her late 30's . It was a very much wanted pregnancy, but after a heartbreaking prenatal diagnosis they made the difficult choice to terminate.

My very pro-life mother was telling about this and understood why the woman made this choice and supported this choice. I then told her "this is why I support a woman's right to have an abortion." To which my mother told me "This isn't an abortion, This is different." Make it make sense.

Anonymous wrote:This is why we cannot have nice things. These argumentative threads all across America right now do no good. Get out there and do grassroots campaigning, gather voting power, speak out, write speeches, share stories nationally to ears that actually matter. If you feel passionate about this, get to it, Stop wasting time on this forum. And, I can say this, as I am not pro-abortion do to my own reasons. But, I applaud women for speaking out for what they believe in.