Anonymous wrote:
+1. And all the people who thought Roe would never be overturn, here we are.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Also from the Washington Post article don’t forget Zeke Brinsfield
“It’s Satan wanting to separate a child from the womb,” Brinsfield told the camera. In an interview later, he voiced a view out of step with many antiabortion activists, saying he opposes abortion even to preserve the life of the woman, because God “gives and takes away in all circumstances.”
Is it out of step? Because the state of Idaho is arguing in the supreme court that they shouldn’t have to save the mother.
Fun y how the same principle is never applied to ED or any condition that only affects men.
That’s the tell. It’s only “god’s will” when it’s a woman’s body, otherwise anything goes.
If the forced birther GOP gets back in power and gets to pass Project 2025, look for carve outs where men would be able to demand their sex partner get an abortion. Because forced birthers don’t care about life, as they’ve demonstrated aptly, they want to control women and the most basic right is bodily autonomy.
There won’t be carve outs. But Republican legislators and donors will always be able to get abortions when needed.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Also from the Washington Post article don’t forget Zeke Brinsfield
“It’s Satan wanting to separate a child from the womb,” Brinsfield told the camera. In an interview later, he voiced a view out of step with many antiabortion activists, saying he opposes abortion even to preserve the life of the woman, because God “gives and takes away in all circumstances.”
Is it out of step? Because the state of Idaho is arguing in the supreme court that they shouldn’t have to save the mother.
Fun y how the same principle is never applied to ED or any condition that only affects men.
That’s the tell. It’s only “god’s will” when it’s a woman’s body, otherwise anything goes.
If the forced birther GOP gets back in power and gets to pass Project 2025, look for carve outs where men would be able to demand their sex partner get an abortion. Because forced birthers don’t care about life, as they’ve demonstrated aptly, they want to control women and the most basic right is bodily autonomy.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Also from the Washington Post article don’t forget Zeke Brinsfield
“It’s Satan wanting to separate a child from the womb,” Brinsfield told the camera. In an interview later, he voiced a view out of step with many antiabortion activists, saying he opposes abortion even to preserve the life of the woman, because God “gives and takes away in all circumstances.”
Is it out of step? Because the state of Idaho is arguing in the supreme court that they shouldn’t have to save the mother.
Fun y how the same principle is never applied to ED or any condition that only affects men.
That’s the tell. It’s only “god’s will” when it’s a woman’s body, otherwise anything goes.
If the forced birther GOP gets back in power and gets to pass Project 2025, look for carve outs where men would be able to demand their sex partner get an abortion. Because forced birthers don’t care about life, as they’ve demonstrated aptly, they want to control women and the most basic right is bodily autonomy.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Also from the Washington Post article don’t forget Zeke Brinsfield
“It’s Satan wanting to separate a child from the womb,” Brinsfield told the camera. In an interview later, he voiced a view out of step with many antiabortion activists, saying he opposes abortion even to preserve the life of the woman, because God “gives and takes away in all circumstances.”
Is it out of step? Because the state of Idaho is arguing in the supreme court that they shouldn’t have to save the mother.
Fun y how the same principle is never applied to ED or any condition that only affects men.
Anonymous wrote:Also from the Washington Post article don’t forget Zeke Brinsfield
“It’s Satan wanting to separate a child from the womb,” Brinsfield told the camera. In an interview later, he voiced a view out of step with many antiabortion activists, saying he opposes abortion even to preserve the life of the woman, because God “gives and takes away in all circumstances.”
Is it out of step? Because the state of Idaho is arguing in the supreme court that they shouldn’t have to save the mother.
Anonymous wrote:In an interview later, he voiced a view out of step with many antiabortion activists, saying he opposes abortion even to preserve the life of the woman, because God “gives and takes away in all circumstances.”
I wonder if he’s ever had any medical treatment himself then.
Anonymous wrote:In an interview later, he voiced a view out of step with many antiabortion activists, saying he opposes abortion even to preserve the life of the woman, because God “gives and takes away in all circumstances.”
I wonder if he’s ever had any medical treatment himself then.
In an interview later, he voiced a view out of step with many antiabortion activists, saying he opposes abortion even to preserve the life of the woman, because God “gives and takes away in all circumstances.”
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Next up for a ballot referendum: Arkansas, hopefully
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/04/26/abortion-ban-arkansas-overturn-activists/
“One Trump supporter hesitated at the idea of legalizing abortion through 18 weeks, but said she would probably back the ballot measure if that was the only way to change the law. Sonya, speaking on the condition that only her first name be used to protect her privacy, said she had had an abortion many years ago as a struggling single mother and would want her daughters to have the same option.
“I know for a fact, for me, it was the best decision,” said Sonya, 59, who added that she is a devout Christian and opposes abortion in many cases.”
You guys… an abortion was the best choice for her, but she only reluctantly supports a restrictive law. Can’t make it up.