Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remember when people said the left was being over the top and hysterical when Kavanaugh and Barrett were confirmed?

Ya, that was fun.

Ya, privileged DC far left elitists should dictate what health laws the people of Mississippi want for themselves because. . . that's democracy.

The Mississippi abortion law has absolutely nothing to do with what Mississippians want for themselves. It is entirely about controlling what OTHER people can and can’t do.

That's what criminal laws do.

In DC, I think it's illegal to engage in: bigamy, incest, and posing in obscene photos. The law prohibits doing it (i.e., DC law says you cannot do that with your own body).

Wow. You want people to be liberated from laws against incest. You SURELY are Republican scum.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remember when people said the left was being over the top and hysterical when Kavanaugh and Barrett were confirmed?

Ya, that was fun.

Ya, privileged DC far left elitists should dictate what health laws the people of Mississippi want for themselves because. . . that's democracy.

The Mississippi abortion law has absolutely nothing to do with what Mississippians want for themselves. It is entirely about controlling what OTHER people can and can’t do.

That's what criminal laws do.

In DC, I think it's illegal to engage in: bigamy, incest, and posing in obscene photos. The law prohibits doing it (i.e., DC law says you cannot do that with your own body).

You’re almost there. What all of your examples have in common though is that those are things you do to other people

Posing? No. I never heard of intercourse as something you "do to other people." Maybe WITH other people. Like an abortion - you do that with assistance of a physician. Nice try.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remember when people said the left was being over the top and hysterical when Kavanaugh and Barrett were confirmed?

Ya, that was fun.

Ya, privileged DC far left elitists should dictate what health laws the people of Mississippi want for themselves because. . . that's democracy.

The Mississippi abortion law has absolutely nothing to do with what Mississippians want for themselves. It is entirely about controlling what OTHER people can and can’t do.

That's what criminal laws do.

In DC, I think it's illegal to engage in: bigamy, incest, and posing in obscene photos. The law prohibits doing it (i.e., DC law says you cannot do that with your own body).

You’re almost there. What all of your examples have in common though is that those are things you do to other people

And the PP will say, bbbbbbut the fetus is a person.

You can legally kill a living breathing out-of-the uterus person in this country for a few reasons. I’m over this debate about when life starts. It’s irrelevant to the discussion of when it’s okay to end one. Because it clearly is totally okay in some circumstances. Just not this one because it would give women too much power.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fine, maybe then. But I’m not hoping for that kind of conversion for anyone. We can’t expect women to vote as a block, but we need to make pregnancy-choice a larger voting block. And that means not letting men off the hook a minute longer.

This. While I’m appalled at the women who have internalized the misogyny and vote PrO lIfE because babeeez, I’m just as pissed that so many men keep voting in support of the patriarchy. It’s beyond time for them to step up.

If I had a buck for every time I saw a male female strategist say “voters eyes glaze over” when they talk about the Supreme Court. Maybe because you’re a terrible strategist who can’t deliver a message. My eyes do something when I think about this Supreme Court. I’ve been weepy all freaking day.

I’m sorry, I know we all make typos and whatnot but I’m not able to guess what kind of strategist this is supposed to be?

I edited above. Male/dem

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remember when people said the left was being over the top and hysterical when Kavanaugh and Barrett were confirmed?

Ya, that was fun.

Ya, privileged DC far left elitists should dictate what health laws the people of Mississippi want for themselves because. . . that's democracy.

The Mississippi abortion law has absolutely nothing to do with what Mississippians want for themselves. It is entirely about controlling what OTHER people can and can’t do.

That's what criminal laws do.

In DC, I think it's illegal to engage in: bigamy, incest, and posing in obscene photos. The law prohibits doing it (i.e., DC law says you cannot do that with your own body).

You’re almost there. What all of your examples have in common though is that those are things you do to other people

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remember when people said the left was being over the top and hysterical when Kavanaugh and Barrett were confirmed?

Ya, that was fun.

Ya, privileged DC far left elitists should dictate what health laws the people of Mississippi want for themselves because. . . that's democracy.

The Mississippi abortion law has absolutely nothing to do with what Mississippians want for themselves. It is entirely about controlling what OTHER people can and can’t do.

That's what criminal laws do.

In DC, I think it's illegal to engage in: bigamy, incest, and posing in obscene photos. The law prohibits doing it (i.e., DC law says you cannot do that with your own body).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fine, maybe then. But I’m not hoping for that kind of conversion for anyone. We can’t expect women to vote as a block, but we need to make pregnancy-choice a larger voting block. And that means not letting men off the hook a minute longer.

This. While I’m appalled at the women who have internalized the misogyny and vote PrO lIfE because babeeez, I’m just as pissed that so many men keep voting in support of the patriarchy. It’s beyond time for them to step up.

If I had a buck for every time I saw a male female strategist say “voters eyes glaze over” when they talk about the Supreme Court. Maybe because you’re a terrible strategist who can’t deliver a message. My eyes do something when I think about this Supreme Court. I’ve been weepy all freaking day.

I’m sorry, I know we all make typos and whatnot but I’m not able to guess what kind of strategist this is supposed to be?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fine, maybe then. But I’m not hoping for that kind of conversion for anyone. We can’t expect women to vote as a block, but we need to make pregnancy-choice a larger voting block. And that means not letting men off the hook a minute longer.

This. While I’m appalled at the women who have internalized the misogyny and vote PrO lIfE because babeeez, I’m just as pissed that so many men keep voting in support of the patriarchy. It’s beyond time for them to step up.

If I had a buck for every time I saw a male female strategist say “voters eyes glaze over” when they talk about the Supreme Court. Maybe because you’re a terrible strategist who can’t deliver a message. My eyes do something when I think about this Supreme Court. I’ve been weepy all freaking day.

That should say “male dem”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fine, maybe then. But I’m not hoping for that kind of conversion for anyone. We can’t expect women to vote as a block, but we need to make pregnancy-choice a larger voting block. And that means not letting men off the hook a minute longer.

This. While I’m appalled at the women who have internalized the misogyny and vote PrO lIfE because babeeez, I’m just as pissed that so many men keep voting in support of the patriarchy. It’s beyond time for them to step up.

If I had a buck for every time I saw a male female strategist say “voters eyes glaze over” when they talk about the Supreme Court. Maybe because you’re a terrible strategist who can’t deliver a message. My eyes do something when I think about this Supreme Court. I’ve been weepy all freaking day.

Anonymous wrote:Fine, maybe then. But I’m not hoping for that kind of conversion for anyone. We can’t expect women to vote as a block, but we need to make pregnancy-choice a larger voting block. And that means not letting men off the hook a minute longer.

This. While I’m appalled at the women who have internalized the misogyny and vote PrO lIfE because babeeez, I’m just as pissed that so many men keep voting in support of the patriarchy. It’s beyond time for them to step up.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will never forget the case that changed Ireland's views on abortion and it was less than 10 years ago. I just remember it was a woman who was 17 weeks pregnant. Something came up later in the pregnancy and the only way she was going to survive was to have an abortion. Being Ireland, she couldn't get it. She did die week later, and of course the fetus died too. How many times will the US go through things like that to decide "yeah, perhaps an abortion is needed more in the medical sense than we thought".

Yup and it just happened in Poland too. There were huge protests and the government basically said, whoops, we didn’t mean it to turn out that way. Oh well. We’ll pray about it. Sorry she’s dead.

And too many women just don’t care, because they’re worried about CRT or some other made up bull to protect the rights of poor women and girls. Maybe when NoVa white women finally find their healthcare impacted in our newly red state, they will wake the hell up.

I’ll say it again: women need to vote 100% pro choice, i.e., in recognition that we are people. There is no “pro-life” vote, there is only a forced-birth, anti-woman vote.

And yet we’ve got a lot of Aunt Lydia’s out there who don’t care, and see it’s to their benefit to subjugate the rest of us.

Even Aunt Lydia got wise in the second book. We need to vote as one: a group that understands that our rights are under attack. The GOP zombie only exists because women still vote for them, for the slimmest of reasons.

It was just a book. Real life Lydia’s don’t change, there is no happy ending. We need allies, women and men.

They do change but only when their daughter tells them their desperately wished for grandson has genetic abnormalities inconsistent with life.

Ask me how I know

Fine, maybe then. But I’m not hoping for that kind of conversion for anyone. We can’t expect women to vote as a block, but we need to make pregnancy-choice a larger voting block. And that means not letting men off the hook a minute longer.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Characterizing women who are anti-abortion as "Aunt Lydias" is not exactly going to win hearts and minds. My mother is anti-abortion and her beliefs are sincere. A lot of it is ignorance about what it actually means in practice to make abortion illegal.

Any ignorance on your mother’s part is willful at this point.

I don’t care about your mother. She’s a lost cause.

Anonymous wrote:Characterizing women who are anti-abortion as "Aunt Lydias" is not exactly going to win hearts and minds. My mother is anti-abortion and her beliefs are sincere. A lot of it is ignorance about what it actually means in practice to make abortion illegal.

Any ignorance on your mother’s part is willful at this point.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Characterizing women who are anti-abortion as "Aunt Lydias" is not exactly going to win hearts and minds. My mother is anti-abortion and her beliefs are sincere. A lot of it is ignorance about what it actually means in practice to make abortion illegal.

With due respect to your mother, participating in the reproductive oppression of other women is very correctly characterized as Aunt Lydia. If that upsets her she needs to consider whether the shoe might fit, not wring her hands about how her feelings are hurt.

+1
No one has really explained to these women how their “sincere” beliefs are used to keep women in poverty and miserable. I don’t know that the adult daughter of a forced birther has tried or if her mother is one of the maga-level people who is completely unable to be reasoned with, but OH MY GOD at what point can we begin leveling with forced birthers? Why do we have to pretend along with them that their beliefs are legitimate? There were slave owners who felt their beliefs that they were entitled to someone else’s life were just and sincere and legitimate too.

Anonymous wrote:Characterizing women who are anti-abortion as "Aunt Lydias" is not exactly going to win hearts and minds. My mother is anti-abortion and her beliefs are sincere. A lot of it is ignorance about what it actually means in practice to make abortion illegal.

No words or appeal to reason will ever convince these types, like your mom. They have to know the pain of loss and suffering before they change their views. Hopefully people like your mom suffers sooner rather than later in order to minimize the body count of women who will die from this dumb Supreme Court.

Stupid is as stupid does.