Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But these we just innocent bAbiEs!!!

Another impact these bans have: economic hardship. Women forced to carry a non viable fetus is more likely to be put on bedrest, or reduced working. Then the birth costs $$$. Even the best insurance has a deductible. Then funeral arrangements $$$. We’re talking an easy 10k unnecessarily spent.

I won’t talk about the emotional costs because we know MAGA could give a 💩 about that.

Oh! Add more costs! At least some of them would have ended up living for a brief period, and depending on the hospital’s policy they might have thrown the kitchen sink, treatment wise, at the newborn, costing thousands in NICU bills.

This has probably bankrupted a few families already.

Just to give people an idea. I had twins that were born 6 weeks premature (34 weeks gestation). One had underdeveloped lungs and developed Respiratory Distress Syndrome (RDS). Basically his lungs could not extract enough oxygen from the air he was breathing. Within 12 hours, he was on a ventillator with almost pure oxygen and when that was insufficient, he underwent a surgical procedure where a surfactent was applied to his lungs which allowed his alveoli to process oxygen better. Within 2 hours of the procedure, he was breathing much more normally. By 12 hours post-surgery he was off of the ventillator. It was miraculous. The twins spent a total of 16 days in the NICU between this procedure and getting them to eat normally, gain weight and develop enough to maintain their body temperature outside of an incubator. All pretty normal stuff for premies. The NICU totals for my children were approximiately $170K per. And our insurance only wanted to cover about $100K of the costs per child trying to claim various issues. I spent a year fighting with them. A year, to the day that the twins came home from the hospital, I finally sent the last form to the insurance and got a revised claim from them. All told, I ended up paying about $13K out of pocket for both.

And this is for normal premie treatment and one extraordinary treatment. And my children were otherwise healthy babies (and are about to turn 13 this summer).

Now, imagine for a child with a congenital syndrome that requires massive amounts of medical attention, treatment, and remediation just to survive a week or two in the NICU and die. These laws are requiring pregnant women, who know that their child will not survive more than a few weeks, to carry the child, to undergo obstetric treatment for the remaining 20 weeks of pregnancy, to risk their own health and fertility, to pay for that medical care in pregnancy, then to give birth to a child suffering pain from the congenital disorder, and then to have NICU space, time, equipment, staff, attend to this child who were terminal before birth, taking away needed NICU space from babies with conditions that they can survive. Who is paying for all this medical treatment, medications, equipment, remediation for these infants?

I was able to handle $13K out of $340K worth or medical care and after a year of fighting was able to get the insurance company to handle the rest. But there are many, many families out there that cannot handle even $13K worth of medical expenses and may have weaker insurance coverage than I had. What if the insurance carrier will not handle the additional costs? What if they can't get the insurance company to bear the NICU costs? Are you going to make parents of much wanted, but terminally ill babies, go bankrupt or have to sell their home just to handle the medical expenses for a pregnancy that they were forced to carry to term just because you didn't want to allow them to abort a terminal infant with a congenital disorder that was incompatible with life?

These politicians are playing God, but they are destroying many lives over their politics.

Cue MAGA - if you can't afforD Kids then Keep your leGs cloSed.

I mean are they wrong though?

Forced birthers like to pretend that they care about life, but scratch that pond scum and you can see the PP for the monster that he is. It’s about controlling and punishing women and incels like this PP are mad as hops that their personalities have driven women far away from them. Killing women, breaking their hearts, destroying their families, robbing them of their future fertility - it’s all good because it punishes those nasty women for not jumping in the sack with them. Of course if they ever had jumped in the sack with that man, we know the names they’d call the women who had sex with them.

So vote carefully in November. It’s a straight Democratic ticket. The GOP and its misogyny must actually start getting crushed.

Millions of “forced birthers” are women who have been pregnant, given birth, and suffered miscarriages.

And had abortions, but their abortions are always moral abortions.

Now you are just projecting.

Anyone who works at a clinic can tell you stories of anti-abortion protesters who have come in for their own abortion. Republican women get abortions at the same rate as Democratic women.

Pro-abortion advocates had five decades to pass a reasonable federal law, same as what every single European country did.

Partisan politics and elections have consequences.

We had it. It was established law for fifty years. The far right wing extremists who lied their way onto the court are anti-American anarchists.

You're crazy. There was no federal law, that was the whole problem. Drop the conspiracy theories and learn how every single Western democracy has come to regulate such a complex topic.

They have zero understanding. Do you think that the leftists posting have any idea that their beloved progressive Nordic welfare states ban abortion as early as 9 weeks? Of course not.

Claims pro choice people have “zero understanding,” proceeds to show she has never actually looked up abortion laws in “Nordic” countries.

Yes PP is lying. Abortion is widely available throughout all of Europe.

Read it and weep, PP.
from https://reproductiverights.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/European-abortion-law-a-comparative-review.pdf


Highly restrictive
abortion laws in Europe
Only six European countries
retain highly restrictive
abortion laws and do not
permit abortion on request or
on broad social grounds.
These are: Andorra, Liechtenstein,
Malta, Monaco, Poland and
San Marino.
• Andorra, Malta and San Marino
do not allow abortion at all.
• Liechtenstein allows abortion
only when a woman’s life or
health is at risk or the pregnancy
is the result of sexual assault.
• Monaco and Poland allow it
only when a woman’s life or
health is at risk, the pregnancy
is the result of sexual assault or
involves a severe fetal anomaly.
• The Danish jurisdiction of the
Faroe Islands also retains a highly
restrictive law.

False

Abortion on demand is only permitted up to 12 weeks in most of Europe.

There is still more flexibility in Europe as those tend to be limits, not flat out bans. Also, in many European countries, they do have other exceptions where abortions are permitted beyond the a 12 or 14 limit especially for mental health or financial reasons.

Moreover, women have much more access to abortions in Europe, along with government healthcare. Which means that women have access to healthcare and can make reproductive decisions earlier.

A 12 week ban in the US is not at all comparable to those in Europe because women in the US dont have the same access to healthcare that European women do.

Anonymous wrote:

“I have done several abortions on women who have regularly picketed my clinics, including a 16 year old schoolgirl who came back to picket the day after her abortion, about three years ago. During her whole stay at the clinic, we felt that she was not quite right, but there were no real warning bells. She insisted that the abortion was her idea and assured us that all was OK. She went through the procedure very smoothly and was discharged with no problems. A quite routine operation. Next morning she was with her mother and several school mates in front of the clinic with the usual anti posters and chants. It appears that she got the abortion she needed and still displayed the appropriate anti views expected of her by her parents, teachers, and peers.” (Physician, Australia)

It is not entirely fair to judge a minor child on actions like this.

I have known many conservative families that would disown a minor teenage girl who "got in trouble" and got pregnant. I have seen families that have thrown a pregnant teenager out of their home for getting pregnant. This 16 year old, could easily have been from a family like that. She had to protest because her righteous conservative family expected it. Not protesting with the family, would have caused criticism and perhaps being thrown out. She had to get the abortion before she showed for fear of being turned out by her family should they find out. She was probably between a rock and a hard place.

So, it's not fair to judge minors from conservative families who protest abortion rights. What they choose to do when they become adults and are on their own, is fair game. But spare some compassion for the children of conservatives who may not feel like they have any choice but to both protest and get an abortion.

Anonymous wrote:Arkansas folks, Sarah F uckabee's state.

“I have done several abortions on women who have regularly picketed my clinics, including a 16 year old schoolgirl who came back to picket the day after her abortion, about three years ago. During her whole stay at the clinic, we felt that she was not quite right, but there were no real warning bells. She insisted that the abortion was her idea and assured us that all was OK. She went through the procedure very smoothly and was discharged with no problems. A quite routine operation. Next morning she was with her mother and several school mates in front of the clinic with the usual anti posters and chants. It appears that she got the abortion she needed and still displayed the appropriate anti views expected of her by her parents, teachers, and peers.” (Physician, Australia)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Women should be able to abort only if the father consents, but a woman shouldn't be able to kill a man's baby because she has a change of heart after consensual intercourse.

Only if the man agrees to gestate it in his own body for 9 months. Then he has a say. Otherwise no. He’s not putting himself at risk for potential death or disfigurement or health problems so he isn’t the one with veto power.

Women aren’t people in the GOP.

Horseshit.

Bodily autonomy and self determination is the basic degree of liberty. We as a nation denied it to African slaves and to Native people. Denying someone the right to determine is a way of erasing a person.

And so: women aren’t people in the GOP. Swear all you like, but forced birtherism is about erasing women and forcing them back into the home, making them live in fear of pregnancy. The GOP wants to take away birth control and that is the next step in the GOP’s erasure of women. You’ll probably try to “nuh uh” back about trans women and sports or something equally idiotic and off topic, but the fact is that a woman choosing when to have children is a universal right among women.

👏👏👏
The Supreme Court of Kansas agrees.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But these we just innocent bAbiEs!!!

Another impact these bans have: economic hardship. Women forced to carry a non viable fetus is more likely to be put on bedrest, or reduced working. Then the birth costs $$$. Even the best insurance has a deductible. Then funeral arrangements $$$. We’re talking an easy 10k unnecessarily spent.

I won’t talk about the emotional costs because we know MAGA could give a 💩 about that.

Oh! Add more costs! At least some of them would have ended up living for a brief period, and depending on the hospital’s policy they might have thrown the kitchen sink, treatment wise, at the newborn, costing thousands in NICU bills.

This has probably bankrupted a few families already.

Just to give people an idea. I had twins that were born 6 weeks premature (34 weeks gestation). One had underdeveloped lungs and developed Respiratory Distress Syndrome (RDS). Basically his lungs could not extract enough oxygen from the air he was breathing. Within 12 hours, he was on a ventillator with almost pure oxygen and when that was insufficient, he underwent a surgical procedure where a surfactent was applied to his lungs which allowed his alveoli to process oxygen better. Within 2 hours of the procedure, he was breathing much more normally. By 12 hours post-surgery he was off of the ventillator. It was miraculous. The twins spent a total of 16 days in the NICU between this procedure and getting them to eat normally, gain weight and develop enough to maintain their body temperature outside of an incubator. All pretty normal stuff for premies. The NICU totals for my children were approximiately $170K per. And our insurance only wanted to cover about $100K of the costs per child trying to claim various issues. I spent a year fighting with them. A year, to the day that the twins came home from the hospital, I finally sent the last form to the insurance and got a revised claim from them. All told, I ended up paying about $13K out of pocket for both.

And this is for normal premie treatment and one extraordinary treatment. And my children were otherwise healthy babies (and are about to turn 13 this summer).

Now, imagine for a child with a congenital syndrome that requires massive amounts of medical attention, treatment, and remediation just to survive a week or two in the NICU and die. These laws are requiring pregnant women, who know that their child will not survive more than a few weeks, to carry the child, to undergo obstetric treatment for the remaining 20 weeks of pregnancy, to risk their own health and fertility, to pay for that medical care in pregnancy, then to give birth to a child suffering pain from the congenital disorder, and then to have NICU space, time, equipment, staff, attend to this child who were terminal before birth, taking away needed NICU space from babies with conditions that they can survive. Who is paying for all this medical treatment, medications, equipment, remediation for these infants?

I was able to handle $13K out of $340K worth or medical care and after a year of fighting was able to get the insurance company to handle the rest. But there are many, many families out there that cannot handle even $13K worth of medical expenses and may have weaker insurance coverage than I had. What if the insurance carrier will not handle the additional costs? What if they can't get the insurance company to bear the NICU costs? Are you going to make parents of much wanted, but terminally ill babies, go bankrupt or have to sell their home just to handle the medical expenses for a pregnancy that they were forced to carry to term just because you didn't want to allow them to abort a terminal infant with a congenital disorder that was incompatible with life?

These politicians are playing God, but they are destroying many lives over their politics.

Cue MAGA - if you can't afforD Kids then Keep your leGs cloSed.

I mean are they wrong though?

Forced birthers like to pretend that they care about life, but scratch that pond scum and you can see the PP for the monster that he is. It’s about controlling and punishing women and incels like this PP are mad as hops that their personalities have driven women far away from them. Killing women, breaking their hearts, destroying their families, robbing them of their future fertility - it’s all good because it punishes those nasty women for not jumping in the sack with them. Of course if they ever had jumped in the sack with that man, we know the names they’d call the women who had sex with them.

So vote carefully in November. It’s a straight Democratic ticket. The GOP and its misogyny must actually start getting crushed.

Millions of “forced birthers” are women who have been pregnant, given birth, and suffered miscarriages.

And had abortions, but their abortions are always moral abortions.

Now you are just projecting.

You’re such a clown. I’ve never had an abortion, not an elective one, not one to clean up after a miscarriage. I am pro choice.

Forced birther women have abortions at the same rates as women who vote for human rights. It’s even a trope, if you’re unaware, the vocab for which stems from this Joyce Arthur piece: https://joycearthur.com/abortion/the-only-moral-abortion-is-my-abortion/

I know forced birthers have an allergy to clicking through on something that might actually prove them incorrect, so I’ll paste part of the piece here:

“[…] In the spring of 2000, I collected the following anecdotes directly from abortion doctors and other clinic staff in North America, Australia, and Europe. The stories are presented in the providers’ own words, with minor editing for grammar, clarity, and brevity. Names have been omitted to protect privacy.

“I have done several abortions on women who have regularly picketed my clinics, including a 16 year old schoolgirl who came back to picket the day after her abortion, about three years ago. During her whole stay at the clinic, we felt that she was not quite right, but there were no real warning bells. She insisted that the abortion was her idea and assured us that all was OK. She went through the procedure very smoothly and was discharged with no problems. A quite routine operation. Next morning she was with her mother and several school mates in front of the clinic with the usual anti posters and chants. It appears that she got the abortion she needed and still displayed the appropriate anti views expected of her by her parents, teachers, and peers.” (Physician, Australia)

“I’ve had several cases over the years in which the anti-abortion patient had rationalized in one way or another that her case was the only exception, but the one that really made an impression was the college senior who was the president of her campus Right-to-Life organization, meaning that she had worked very hard in that organization for several years. As I was completing her procedure, I asked what she planned to do about her high office in the RTL organization. Her response was a wide-eyed, ‘You’re not going to tell them, are you!?’ When assured that I was not, she breathed a sigh of relief, explaining how important that position was to her and how she wouldn’t want this to interfere with it.” (Physician, Texas)

“In 1990, in the Boston area, Operation Rescue and other groups were regularly blockading the clinics, and many of us went every Saturday morning for months to help women and staff get in. As a result, we knew many of the ‘antis’ by face. One morning, a woman who had been a regular ‘sidewalk counselor’ went into the clinic with a young woman who looked like she was 16-17, and obviously her daughter. When the mother came out about an hour later, I had to go up and ask her if her daughter’s situation had caused her to change her mind. ‘I don’t expect you to understand my daughter’s situation!’ she angrily replied. The following Saturday, she was back, pleading with women entering the clinic not to ‘murder their babies.'” (Clinic escort, Massachusetts)”

And so, many, many forced birther women are big ol’ hypocrites. As are many forced birther male politicians who have paid for abortions (or in the case of a Trump staffer, putting abortion-causing drugs in his girlfriend’s drink: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/jason-miller-abortion-pill-smoothie-trump-aide-aj-delgado-a8552321.html).

All I see are a lot of anecdotes cherry picked to support the authors position.

Clearly you have no data or evidence to support your claim that anti-abortion women have the same rates of abortion as pro-choice women.

Women have always had abortions. Women across time and cultures and the political spectrum. They will continue to always have them no matter how much medieval-minded retrogrades try and even succeed in banning it. No matter if you ban abortions from the moment of conception (a ridiculous thing to try if ever there was one) there will ALWAYS be abortions. Because women do not always want to gestate or cannot accept gestating a baby into this world. What people like you are going to do is force abortions to go underground and become unsafe. I know you think that's okay since you want to punish women for getting one. But some day someone you know and care about is going to be harmed by your party's extremism. Oh well.

This. But they know it. They just want more poor ppl in the world.
Abortion is healthcare. I’m
Pro abortion as a means to help women. And my vote is just as important as yours.

Unlike you, I don’t find people who are poor to have inherently less value so therefore they shouldn’t pro-create. I bet you consider yourself “progressive” while at opining that abortion is needed to control the population of poor people.

You honestly believe that forcing low-income women to give birth against their will is the right thing to do?

It’s such a huge violation of someone’s privacy - I can’t even imagine the sense of entitlement to force other people to undertake such a huge risk/commitment against their will.

Women of all incomes are capable of making their own decisions. They don’t need you forcing your judgment and religion on them.

I’m an atheist, and I don’t force atheism on anyone.

If you really believed that women of all incomes were capable of making their own decisions, you might want to ask why they decided to create a pregnancy that they don’t want. Cases of rape excluded of course. Or you don’t believe that low income women can truly provide consent to sexual intercourse?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Women should be able to abort only if the father consents, but a woman shouldn't be able to kill a man's baby because she has a change of heart after consensual intercourse.

Only if the man agrees to gestate it in his own body for 9 months. Then he has a say. Otherwise no. He’s not putting himself at risk for potential death or disfigurement or health problems so he isn’t the one with veto power.

Women aren’t people in the GOP.

Horseshit.

Bodily autonomy and self determination is the basic degree of liberty. We as a nation denied it to African slaves and to Native people. Denying someone the right to determine is a way of erasing a person.

And so: women aren’t people in the GOP. Swear all you like, but forced birtherism is about erasing women and forcing them back into the home, making them live in fear of pregnancy. The GOP wants to take away birth control and that is the next step in the GOP’s erasure of women. You’ll probably try to “nuh uh” back about trans women and sports or something equally idiotic and off topic, but the fact is that a woman choosing when to have children is a universal right among women.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But these we just innocent bAbiEs!!!

Another impact these bans have: economic hardship. Women forced to carry a non viable fetus is more likely to be put on bedrest, or reduced working. Then the birth costs $$$. Even the best insurance has a deductible. Then funeral arrangements $$$. We’re talking an easy 10k unnecessarily spent.

I won’t talk about the emotional costs because we know MAGA could give a 💩 about that.

Oh! Add more costs! At least some of them would have ended up living for a brief period, and depending on the hospital’s policy they might have thrown the kitchen sink, treatment wise, at the newborn, costing thousands in NICU bills.

This has probably bankrupted a few families already.

Just to give people an idea. I had twins that were born 6 weeks premature (34 weeks gestation). One had underdeveloped lungs and developed Respiratory Distress Syndrome (RDS). Basically his lungs could not extract enough oxygen from the air he was breathing. Within 12 hours, he was on a ventillator with almost pure oxygen and when that was insufficient, he underwent a surgical procedure where a surfactent was applied to his lungs which allowed his alveoli to process oxygen better. Within 2 hours of the procedure, he was breathing much more normally. By 12 hours post-surgery he was off of the ventillator. It was miraculous. The twins spent a total of 16 days in the NICU between this procedure and getting them to eat normally, gain weight and develop enough to maintain their body temperature outside of an incubator. All pretty normal stuff for premies. The NICU totals for my children were approximiately $170K per. And our insurance only wanted to cover about $100K of the costs per child trying to claim various issues. I spent a year fighting with them. A year, to the day that the twins came home from the hospital, I finally sent the last form to the insurance and got a revised claim from them. All told, I ended up paying about $13K out of pocket for both.

And this is for normal premie treatment and one extraordinary treatment. And my children were otherwise healthy babies (and are about to turn 13 this summer).

Now, imagine for a child with a congenital syndrome that requires massive amounts of medical attention, treatment, and remediation just to survive a week or two in the NICU and die. These laws are requiring pregnant women, who know that their child will not survive more than a few weeks, to carry the child, to undergo obstetric treatment for the remaining 20 weeks of pregnancy, to risk their own health and fertility, to pay for that medical care in pregnancy, then to give birth to a child suffering pain from the congenital disorder, and then to have NICU space, time, equipment, staff, attend to this child who were terminal before birth, taking away needed NICU space from babies with conditions that they can survive. Who is paying for all this medical treatment, medications, equipment, remediation for these infants?

I was able to handle $13K out of $340K worth or medical care and after a year of fighting was able to get the insurance company to handle the rest. But there are many, many families out there that cannot handle even $13K worth of medical expenses and may have weaker insurance coverage than I had. What if the insurance carrier will not handle the additional costs? What if they can't get the insurance company to bear the NICU costs? Are you going to make parents of much wanted, but terminally ill babies, go bankrupt or have to sell their home just to handle the medical expenses for a pregnancy that they were forced to carry to term just because you didn't want to allow them to abort a terminal infant with a congenital disorder that was incompatible with life?

These politicians are playing God, but they are destroying many lives over their politics.

Cue MAGA - if you can't afforD Kids then Keep your leGs cloSed.

I mean are they wrong though?

Forced birthers like to pretend that they care about life, but scratch that pond scum and you can see the PP for the monster that he is. It’s about controlling and punishing women and incels like this PP are mad as hops that their personalities have driven women far away from them. Killing women, breaking their hearts, destroying their families, robbing them of their future fertility - it’s all good because it punishes those nasty women for not jumping in the sack with them. Of course if they ever had jumped in the sack with that man, we know the names they’d call the women who had sex with them.

So vote carefully in November. It’s a straight Democratic ticket. The GOP and its misogyny must actually start getting crushed.

Millions of “forced birthers” are women who have been pregnant, given birth, and suffered miscarriages.

And had abortions, but their abortions are always moral abortions.

Now you are just projecting.

You’re such a clown. I’ve never had an abortion, not an elective one, not one to clean up after a miscarriage. I am pro choice.

Forced birther women have abortions at the same rates as women who vote for human rights. It’s even a trope, if you’re unaware, the vocab for which stems from this Joyce Arthur piece: https://joycearthur.com/abortion/the-only-moral-abortion-is-my-abortion/

I know forced birthers have an allergy to clicking through on something that might actually prove them incorrect, so I’ll paste part of the piece here:

“[…] In the spring of 2000, I collected the following anecdotes directly from abortion doctors and other clinic staff in North America, Australia, and Europe. The stories are presented in the providers’ own words, with minor editing for grammar, clarity, and brevity. Names have been omitted to protect privacy.

“I have done several abortions on women who have regularly picketed my clinics, including a 16 year old schoolgirl who came back to picket the day after her abortion, about three years ago. During her whole stay at the clinic, we felt that she was not quite right, but there were no real warning bells. She insisted that the abortion was her idea and assured us that all was OK. She went through the procedure very smoothly and was discharged with no problems. A quite routine operation. Next morning she was with her mother and several school mates in front of the clinic with the usual anti posters and chants. It appears that she got the abortion she needed and still displayed the appropriate anti views expected of her by her parents, teachers, and peers.” (Physician, Australia)

“I’ve had several cases over the years in which the anti-abortion patient had rationalized in one way or another that her case was the only exception, but the one that really made an impression was the college senior who was the president of her campus Right-to-Life organization, meaning that she had worked very hard in that organization for several years. As I was completing her procedure, I asked what she planned to do about her high office in the RTL organization. Her response was a wide-eyed, ‘You’re not going to tell them, are you!?’ When assured that I was not, she breathed a sigh of relief, explaining how important that position was to her and how she wouldn’t want this to interfere with it.” (Physician, Texas)

“In 1990, in the Boston area, Operation Rescue and other groups were regularly blockading the clinics, and many of us went every Saturday morning for months to help women and staff get in. As a result, we knew many of the ‘antis’ by face. One morning, a woman who had been a regular ‘sidewalk counselor’ went into the clinic with a young woman who looked like she was 16-17, and obviously her daughter. When the mother came out about an hour later, I had to go up and ask her if her daughter’s situation had caused her to change her mind. ‘I don’t expect you to understand my daughter’s situation!’ she angrily replied. The following Saturday, she was back, pleading with women entering the clinic not to ‘murder their babies.'” (Clinic escort, Massachusetts)”

And so, many, many forced birther women are big ol’ hypocrites. As are many forced birther male politicians who have paid for abortions (or in the case of a Trump staffer, putting abortion-causing drugs in his girlfriend’s drink: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/jason-miller-abortion-pill-smoothie-trump-aide-aj-delgado-a8552321.html).

All I see are a lot of anecdotes cherry picked to support the authors position.

Clearly you have no data or evidence to support your claim that anti-abortion women have the same rates of abortion as pro-choice women.

Women have always had abortions. Women across time and cultures and the political spectrum. They will continue to always have them no matter how much medieval-minded retrogrades try and even succeed in banning it. No matter if you ban abortions from the moment of conception (a ridiculous thing to try if ever there was one) there will ALWAYS be abortions. Because women do not always want to gestate or cannot accept gestating a baby into this world. What people like you are going to do is force abortions to go underground and become unsafe. I know you think that's okay since you want to punish women for getting one. But some day someone you know and care about is going to be harmed by your party's extremism. Oh well.

This. But they know it. They just want more poor ppl in the world.
Abortion is healthcare. I’m
Pro abortion as a means to help women. And my vote is just as important as yours.

Unlike you, I don’t find people who are poor to have inherently less value so therefore they shouldn’t pro-create. I bet you consider yourself “progressive” while at opining that abortion is needed to control the population of poor people.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But these we just innocent bAbiEs!!!

Another impact these bans have: economic hardship. Women forced to carry a non viable fetus is more likely to be put on bedrest, or reduced working. Then the birth costs $$$. Even the best insurance has a deductible. Then funeral arrangements $$$. We’re talking an easy 10k unnecessarily spent.

I won’t talk about the emotional costs because we know MAGA could give a 💩 about that.

Oh! Add more costs! At least some of them would have ended up living for a brief period, and depending on the hospital’s policy they might have thrown the kitchen sink, treatment wise, at the newborn, costing thousands in NICU bills.

This has probably bankrupted a few families already.

Just to give people an idea. I had twins that were born 6 weeks premature (34 weeks gestation). One had underdeveloped lungs and developed Respiratory Distress Syndrome (RDS). Basically his lungs could not extract enough oxygen from the air he was breathing. Within 12 hours, he was on a ventillator with almost pure oxygen and when that was insufficient, he underwent a surgical procedure where a surfactent was applied to his lungs which allowed his alveoli to process oxygen better. Within 2 hours of the procedure, he was breathing much more normally. By 12 hours post-surgery he was off of the ventillator. It was miraculous. The twins spent a total of 16 days in the NICU between this procedure and getting them to eat normally, gain weight and develop enough to maintain their body temperature outside of an incubator. All pretty normal stuff for premies. The NICU totals for my children were approximiately $170K per. And our insurance only wanted to cover about $100K of the costs per child trying to claim various issues. I spent a year fighting with them. A year, to the day that the twins came home from the hospital, I finally sent the last form to the insurance and got a revised claim from them. All told, I ended up paying about $13K out of pocket for both.

And this is for normal premie treatment and one extraordinary treatment. And my children were otherwise healthy babies (and are about to turn 13 this summer).

Now, imagine for a child with a congenital syndrome that requires massive amounts of medical attention, treatment, and remediation just to survive a week or two in the NICU and die. These laws are requiring pregnant women, who know that their child will not survive more than a few weeks, to carry the child, to undergo obstetric treatment for the remaining 20 weeks of pregnancy, to risk their own health and fertility, to pay for that medical care in pregnancy, then to give birth to a child suffering pain from the congenital disorder, and then to have NICU space, time, equipment, staff, attend to this child who were terminal before birth, taking away needed NICU space from babies with conditions that they can survive. Who is paying for all this medical treatment, medications, equipment, remediation for these infants?

I was able to handle $13K out of $340K worth or medical care and after a year of fighting was able to get the insurance company to handle the rest. But there are many, many families out there that cannot handle even $13K worth of medical expenses and may have weaker insurance coverage than I had. What if the insurance carrier will not handle the additional costs? What if they can't get the insurance company to bear the NICU costs? Are you going to make parents of much wanted, but terminally ill babies, go bankrupt or have to sell their home just to handle the medical expenses for a pregnancy that they were forced to carry to term just because you didn't want to allow them to abort a terminal infant with a congenital disorder that was incompatible with life?

These politicians are playing God, but they are destroying many lives over their politics.

Cue MAGA - if you can't afforD Kids then Keep your leGs cloSed.

I mean are they wrong though?

Forced birthers like to pretend that they care about life, but scratch that pond scum and you can see the PP for the monster that he is. It’s about controlling and punishing women and incels like this PP are mad as hops that their personalities have driven women far away from them. Killing women, breaking their hearts, destroying their families, robbing them of their future fertility - it’s all good because it punishes those nasty women for not jumping in the sack with them. Of course if they ever had jumped in the sack with that man, we know the names they’d call the women who had sex with them.

So vote carefully in November. It’s a straight Democratic ticket. The GOP and its misogyny must actually start getting crushed.

Millions of “forced birthers” are women who have been pregnant, given birth, and suffered miscarriages.

And had abortions, but their abortions are always moral abortions.

Now you are just projecting.

You’re such a clown. I’ve never had an abortion, not an elective one, not one to clean up after a miscarriage. I am pro choice.

Forced birther women have abortions at the same rates as women who vote for human rights. It’s even a trope, if you’re unaware, the vocab for which stems from this Joyce Arthur piece: https://joycearthur.com/abortion/the-only-moral-abortion-is-my-abortion/

I know forced birthers have an allergy to clicking through on something that might actually prove them incorrect, so I’ll paste part of the piece here:

“[…] In the spring of 2000, I collected the following anecdotes directly from abortion doctors and other clinic staff in North America, Australia, and Europe. The stories are presented in the providers’ own words, with minor editing for grammar, clarity, and brevity. Names have been omitted to protect privacy.

“I have done several abortions on women who have regularly picketed my clinics, including a 16 year old schoolgirl who came back to picket the day after her abortion, about three years ago. During her whole stay at the clinic, we felt that she was not quite right, but there were no real warning bells. She insisted that the abortion was her idea and assured us that all was OK. She went through the procedure very smoothly and was discharged with no problems. A quite routine operation. Next morning she was with her mother and several school mates in front of the clinic with the usual anti posters and chants. It appears that she got the abortion she needed and still displayed the appropriate anti views expected of her by her parents, teachers, and peers.” (Physician, Australia)

“I’ve had several cases over the years in which the anti-abortion patient had rationalized in one way or another that her case was the only exception, but the one that really made an impression was the college senior who was the president of her campus Right-to-Life organization, meaning that she had worked very hard in that organization for several years. As I was completing her procedure, I asked what she planned to do about her high office in the RTL organization. Her response was a wide-eyed, ‘You’re not going to tell them, are you!?’ When assured that I was not, she breathed a sigh of relief, explaining how important that position was to her and how she wouldn’t want this to interfere with it.” (Physician, Texas)

“In 1990, in the Boston area, Operation Rescue and other groups were regularly blockading the clinics, and many of us went every Saturday morning for months to help women and staff get in. As a result, we knew many of the ‘antis’ by face. One morning, a woman who had been a regular ‘sidewalk counselor’ went into the clinic with a young woman who looked like she was 16-17, and obviously her daughter. When the mother came out about an hour later, I had to go up and ask her if her daughter’s situation had caused her to change her mind. ‘I don’t expect you to understand my daughter’s situation!’ she angrily replied. The following Saturday, she was back, pleading with women entering the clinic not to ‘murder their babies.'” (Clinic escort, Massachusetts)”

And so, many, many forced birther women are big ol’ hypocrites. As are many forced birther male politicians who have paid for abortions (or in the case of a Trump staffer, putting abortion-causing drugs in his girlfriend’s drink: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/jason-miller-abortion-pill-smoothie-trump-aide-aj-delgado-a8552321.html).

All I see are a lot of anecdotes cherry picked to support the authors position.

Clearly you have no data or evidence to support your claim that anti-abortion women have the same rates of abortion as pro-choice women.

Women have always had abortions. Women across time and cultures and the political spectrum. They will continue to always have them no matter how much medieval-minded retrogrades try and even succeed in banning it. No matter if you ban abortions from the moment of conception (a ridiculous thing to try if ever there was one) there will ALWAYS be abortions. Because women do not always want to gestate or cannot accept gestating a baby into this world. What people like you are going to do is force abortions to go underground and become unsafe. I know you think that's okay since you want to punish women for getting one. But some day someone you know and care about is going to be harmed by your party's extremism. Oh well.

This. But they know it. They just want more poor ppl in the world.
Abortion is healthcare. I’m
Pro abortion as a means to help women. And my vote is just as important as yours.

Unlike you, I don’t find people who are poor to have inherently less value so therefore they shouldn’t pro-create. I bet you consider yourself “progressive” while at opining that abortion is needed to control the population of poor people.

You honestly believe that forcing low-income women to give birth against their will is the right thing to do?

It’s such a huge violation of someone’s privacy - I can’t even imagine the sense of entitlement to force other people to undertake such a huge risk/commitment against their will.

Women of all incomes are capable of making their own decisions. They don’t need you forcing your judgment and religion on them.

I’m an atheist, and I don’t force atheism on anyone.

If you really believed that women of all incomes were capable of making their own decisions, you might want to ask why they decided to create a pregnancy that they don’t want. Cases of rape excluded of course. Or you don’t believe that low income women can truly provide consent to sexual intercourse?

Since you seem rather ignorant about women's health, let me explain: there are many reasons why a woman may want or need to end a pregnancy. She does not need to justify them to you and you don't get to force yourself onto her.

Again, the question was: You honestly believe that FORCING low-income women to give birth AGAINST HER WILL is the right thing to do?

Anonymous wrote:Arkansas folks, Sarah F uckabee's state.

Anonymous wrote:Arkansas folks, Sarah F uckabee's state.