Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Yet another thing forced birthers said we were crazy for thinking would happen.

Let’s all listen to the deafening silence of forced birthers now:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ruling explicitly states the fetus has more rights than the woman.
Of course not once it’s born. No one can be compelled to even donate blood for it, once born. Only while it relies on a woman in utero.
Crazy, but the logic works when you realize it’s always about the rights of men. A potential donor outside the womb might be male, and he must never be compelled or infringed.
But the life in the womb might also be male, and must take precedence.
It’s twisted but consistent.

It’s crazy that a fetus, which is not a fully formed human, has more rights than an actual living, breathing human being.

It’s literally insane that millions of people still believe that its “potential” is worth more than the actual human. Like she’s useless, just a vessel, but that fetus? It could be a man. We can’t get rid of a man.

+1. Especially one they might get to procure and raise as a proper God fearing Republican, for just the costs of a home study and attorney’s fees.

Because remember- that potential life stops having value once Republicans can’t buy it or monetize it anymore!

For "pro-lifers," potential life stops having value once it is actually born.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ruling explicitly states the fetus has more rights than the woman.
Of course not once it’s born. No one can be compelled to even donate blood for it, once born. Only while it relies on a woman in utero.
Crazy, but the logic works when you realize it’s always about the rights of men. A potential donor outside the womb might be male, and he must never be compelled or infringed.
But the life in the womb might also be male, and must take precedence.
It’s twisted but consistent.

It’s crazy that a fetus, which is not a fully formed human, has more rights than an actual living, breathing human being.

It’s literally insane that millions of people still believe that its “potential” is worth more than the actual human. Like she’s useless, just a vessel, but that fetus? It could be a man. We can’t get rid of a man.

+1. Especially one they might get to procure and raise as a proper God fearing Republican, for just the costs of a home study and attorney’s fees.

Because remember- that potential life stops having value once Republicans can’t buy it or monetize it anymore!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ruling explicitly states the fetus has more rights than the woman.
Of course not once it’s born. No one can be compelled to even donate blood for it, once born. Only while it relies on a woman in utero.
Crazy, but the logic works when you realize it’s always about the rights of men. A potential donor outside the womb might be male, and he must never be compelled or infringed.
But the life in the womb might also be male, and must take precedence.
It’s twisted but consistent.

It’s crazy that a fetus, which is not a fully formed human, has more rights than an actual living, breathing human being.

It’s literally insane that millions of people still believe that its “potential” is worth more than the actual human. Like she’s useless, just a vessel, but that fetus? It could be a man. We can’t get rid of a man.

Anonymous wrote:This story makes me feel physically ill on behalf of that poor little girl. Our rich, “civilized” society has 100% failed her. And all being explicitly condoned by the forced birth group. Their takeaway from this story is probably that the pro-choice people exaggerate about the danger of young girls being pregnant. They are probably talking among theirselves saying, “See!!’ This girl was able to give birth safely so why do we need abortion exceptions for girls who are raped?”

How did this group get so much power over women even when the voting public does NOT want this. If we don’t show up at the polls in overwhelming numbers, more of this is to come.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ruling explicitly states the fetus has more rights than the woman.
Of course not once it’s born. No one can be compelled to even donate blood for it, once born. Only while it relies on a woman in utero.
Crazy, but the logic works when you realize it’s always about the rights of men. A potential donor outside the womb might be male, and he must never be compelled or infringed.
But the life in the womb might also be male, and must take precedence.
It’s twisted but consistent.

It’s crazy that a fetus, which is not a fully formed human, has more rights than an actual living, breathing human being.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ruling explicitly states the fetus has more rights than the woman.
Of course not once it’s born. No one can be compelled to even donate blood for it, once born. Only while it relies on a woman in utero.
Crazy, but the logic works when you realize it’s always about the rights of men. A potential donor outside the womb might be male, and he must never be compelled or infringed.
But the life in the womb might also be male, and must take precedence.
It’s twisted but consistent.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Republicans awfully quiet about this story. I guess they're too busy trying to spin TFG's corruption in Georgia.

I have seen some of the MAGA on Twitter praising this as a great outcome because the baby was "saved." Not the 13 year old baby, mind you, whose life is now pretty much destroyed. But again, once a baby is born the GOP turns its head and couldn't care less about it.

They will, like the with the ten year old rape victim, clutch at straws: it isn’t true. it’s her mother’s fault. it’s an immigrant’s fault. it wasn’t rape and she was asking for it. it’s the doctor’s fault. it’s the fault of pro choice thinking.

Forced birthers are stupid people without even so much as two bits of empathy to rub together to start a fire for warmth.

Yes, I've already seen it, anti-abortionists saying the real question is why we aren't going after the creep who raped her. Never mind that's a question for the local police department, which has not been pursuing the case. And it's a little too late for that 12 year old once she's been raped if you don't offer her means to end the pregnancy.

Greg Abbott said his abortion law wouldn't punish raped women and girls because his state was going to make rape go away, so female of pregnancy age wouldn't have to worry about that horrible prospect (pat pat your pretty little head). How do you think that's going?

Updated reporting shows that even though a police report was immediately filed, they only came to collect DNA after the baby was born. I mean yeah that’s an open and shut case but imagine if police actually done anything to help this poor child! The police chief said as his excuse that “things slip a little”

Men don't care about rape. Police don't care about rape. Women are often -OFTEN- not believed. There was a great article in the Atlantic a few years ago that laid it out pretty plainly.
And the fact is, there are 10's of thousands of rape kits in backlog across this country. Not only preventing rapists from being caught but, since these folks often are criminal in other ways, prevent other crimes from being solved as well.
https://usafacts.org/articles/how-many-rape-kits-are-awaiting-testing-in-the-us-see-the-data-by-state/

Having read a few articles around that subject, when they have bothered to get off their butts and investigate, many of those rapists are serial rapists. Had they done their jobs and gotten those creeps off the street, who knows how many women and girls would not have been victimized.

Anonymous wrote: