Again, the vast, vast majority of “right to life” people have never been. If they were, if they truly cared about the lives and health of children they’d be in favor of providing neo-natal care to expectant mothers, daycare support, and making birth control widely available (the *best* way to prevent abortions is to prevent unwanted pregnancies).
Instead they’ve been adamantly, *militantly* opposed to all of those and to anything that actually helps and supports women.
It has never been about abortion or right-to-life. Those are the acceptable sounding cover they put over their real objective: It has always and ONLY ever been about controlling other people’s lives and taking freedom away from other people.
Maher didn't do pro-choice advocates any favors when he said, It's murder, but I don't care.
What is your stance on abortion exactly?
I have no problem compromising, but at some point we do have to take responsibility for our own choices. That's the hard truth of being an adult.
Places such as Planned Parenthood receive government (taxpayer) funding, therefore you do give every taxpayer a say in this matter. You can't really believe that they don't use that funding for abortions. In cases such as rape, incest or a danger to the mothers' health, it should be okay to use said funds. But let's be honest, and admit that most would lie to get what they want. In that case, you'd have to have a strict penalty that no one would want to pay.
If a woman wants an abortion just because, then she (and he) should pay for it.
As for neo-natal care and other services, where does the money come from? We don't have it. But there are ways to alleviate that problem, and it all starts with the government.
But, we do have to have a starting point of compromise.
Oh please. Y’all decided that women seeking abortions were “the enemy” from Day One.
That’s why we got the Hyde Amendment, right? Because haters of Roe figured out real quick that the first group they could deprive of abortion access were women too poor to pay.
Want to talk about “attitude”? What about the folks who LIED about PP for decades?
Why did they wait until 95% of abortions occurred within the first 49 days to decide that women shouldn’t be afforded any choice at all?
Why did they advocate for policies that purposefully prolonged unwanted pregnancies?
Why on earth would they force women to risk death before they can be treated for a miscarriage?
Why are they in support of preserving parental rights for rapists?
No. You’ll have to forgive me if I’m no longer in a conciliatory mood. Like I said, we’re done with it. This isn’t about a cause. It’s about OUR personhood as women and citizens of this nation.
It’s time to assert our agency. Women are not property.
Where "life begins" is always going to be up for debate. There is no clear, bright line that can be drawn to determine when an abortion is OK and when it's not. When an abortion is OK and when it's not is always, ultimately, going to come down to a matter of opinion. Any discussion should at least start by acknowledging that.
My point in my previous comment had nothing to do with who funds what or much of what else you included in your reply. It was specifically about calling out the hypocrisy of those who claim to be "for life".
While there are people whose opposition to abortions is rooted in a sincere moral belief who also extend that compassion to the pregnant woman, they are very rare. They certainly aren't the vocal, self-righteous people that picket Planned Parenthood, demand doctors withhold information from their patients (or, far worse, lie to their patients), and/or focus their energies on making things as horrendously bad as possible for women.
Yes. Because if you’re going to de-person a woman to the point of stripping away her bodily autonomy then YOU are responsible for the consequences of THAT decision.
Essentially, they are telling doctors to perform triage on pregnant women, and their decision during that triage might affect their own future, including imprisonment. I'm sitting here wondering when the doctors leave these states. Doctors I presume are more mobile than others, kind of like how I am with teaching. Everybody needs doctors and teachers.
In 1997, I rushed my friend's wife into the emergency room with what turned out to be an ectopic pregnancy. She needed attention quickly and they performed an emergency surgery. I know this is the type of thing Justin is talking about.
The practical effect of these laws is that physicians and medical facilities will potentially face severe legal consequences for removing a dead or non-viable fetus and no legal consequences for allowing a woman to die.
So if you are a physician or the board of a medical facility, which sword are you going to fall on? Loss of licensure and potentially prison? Or civil liability for which you carry malpractice insurance and which these laws may actually mitigate in your favor anyway?
But tell me again there is no “war on women” or that SCOTUS doesn’t matter enough to vote for the pantsuit lady.
Those of us living in secular hospital deserts have been living this hell for years. At Adventist, a patient of mine was even asked if she had her husband’s permission to have her tubes tied. In this nearly 4000 square mile county, due to an Adventist monopoly there is no option for pregnancy termination at all. Women’s autonomy has been irreparably damaged even in blue states where religious monopolies are allowed. People blue states seem to think this doesn’t affect them. Wrong. Looking at you Gavin Newsom and the Democratic Assembly and Democratic State Senate….
I am way past chid-bearing age, but it terrifies me that my closest hospitals are all Catholic. Am not sure they would give mr a morphine pump like my Mom got when she was in terminal heart failure.😣🤬
Republicans will never outlaw condoms. If they did, far too many wives (and a few children) of legislators will develop sexually transmitted diseases. Can't let the secrets out in the open.
“Pro-life? Maybe not so much.”
Maybe? Try “never have been.”
Again, the vast, vast majority of “right to life” people have never been. If they were, if they truly cared about the lives and health of children they’d be in favor of providing neo-natal care to expectant mothers, daycare support, and making birth control widely available (the *best* way to prevent abortions is to prevent unwanted pregnancies).
Instead they’ve been adamantly, *militantly* opposed to all of those and to anything that actually helps and supports women.
It has never been about abortion or right-to-life. Those are the acceptable sounding cover they put over their real objective: It has always and ONLY ever been about controlling other people’s lives and taking freedom away from other people.
Maher didn't do pro-choice advocates any favors when he said, It's murder, but I don't care.
What is your stance on abortion exactly?
I have no problem compromising, but at some point we do have to take responsibility for our own choices. That's the hard truth of being an adult.
Places such as Planned Parenthood receive government (taxpayer) funding, therefore you do give every taxpayer a say in this matter. You can't really believe that they don't use that funding for abortions. In cases such as rape, incest or a danger to the mothers' health, it should be okay to use said funds. But let's be honest, and admit that most would lie to get what they want. In that case, you'd have to have a strict penalty that no one would want to pay.
If a woman wants an abortion just because, then she (and he) should pay for it.
As for neo-natal care and other services, where does the money come from? We don't have it. But there are ways to alleviate that problem, and it all starts with the government.
But, we do have to have a starting point of compromise.
Forced birthers attacked Planned Parenthood for decades, hunting for proof that they’d spent even a penny of taxpayer money on abortion.
And after decades of harassment, they found nada.
So what was their “compromise”?
Shutting PP down.
Because truth never mattered to them. Something, something about how folks lie to get what they want.
And of course, there was no responsibility taken by anyone for years of CHOOSING TO LIE about PP using taxpayer money.
So no, y’all don’t get to dictate to us about “compromise.” We spent 50 years compromising with lying lunatics. We’re so done with it.
I can see it from both sides. But you and anyone else with this attitude aren't going to help your cause. All you're going to do is create enemies.
Oh please. Y’all decided that women seeking abortions were “the enemy” from Day One.
That’s why we got the Hyde Amendment, right? Because haters of Roe figured out real quick that the first group they could deprive of abortion access were women too poor to pay.
Want to talk about “attitude”? What about the folks who LIED about PP for decades?
Why did they wait until 95% of abortions occurred within the first 49 days to decide that women shouldn’t be afforded any choice at all?
Why did they advocate for policies that purposefully prolonged unwanted pregnancies?
Why on earth would they force women to risk death before they can be treated for a miscarriage?
Why are they in support of preserving parental rights for rapists?
No. You’ll have to forgive me if I’m no longer in a conciliatory mood. Like I said, we’re done with it. This isn’t about a cause. It’s about OUR personhood as women and citizens of this nation.
It’s time to assert our agency. Women are not property.
My wife is anti abortion, not me. I'm not for forcing anything on anyone. I'm no one's enemy in this.
Where "life begins" is always going to be up for debate. There is no clear, bright line that can be drawn to determine when an abortion is OK and when it's not. When an abortion is OK and when it's not is always, ultimately, going to come down to a matter of opinion. Any discussion should at least start by acknowledging that.
My point in my previous comment had nothing to do with who funds what or much of what else you included in your reply. It was specifically about calling out the hypocrisy of those who claim to be "for life".
While there are people whose opposition to abortions is rooted in a sincere moral belief who also extend that compassion to the pregnant woman, they are very rare. They certainly aren't the vocal, self-righteous people that picket Planned Parenthood, demand doctors withhold information from their patients (or, far worse, lie to their patients), and/or focus their energies on making things as horrendously bad as possible for women.
If I’m against baby murder I have to be pro welfare mom?
Nothing about getting yourself knocked up entitles you to anything. Just don’t get knocked up in the first place.
What do you just slip on a banana peel all of a sudden a dick is inside you? How the fuck do you think babies are made?
“If I’m against baby murder I have to be pro welfare mom?”
If you wanna talk about what I actually wrote, let’s do that. It could be interesting.
But if you want to throw up straw men to mischaracterize what I wrote then you’ll have to carry on that dialogue entirely by yourself.
Yes. Because if you’re going to de-person a woman to the point of stripping away her bodily autonomy then YOU are responsible for the consequences of THAT decision.
“And in North Carolina, a woman gave birth in a car after an emergency room couldn’t offer an ultrasound. The baby later died.”
And Republicans support these laws because they, ahem, “care about the lives of the unborn”.
Can we just ignore everything Republicans say? Round them up, send them to explore Antarctica or something?
Maybe the moon? Just spit balling here.
Essentially, they are telling doctors to perform triage on pregnant women, and their decision during that triage might affect their own future, including imprisonment. I'm sitting here wondering when the doctors leave these states. Doctors I presume are more mobile than others, kind of like how I am with teaching. Everybody needs doctors and teachers.
In 1997, I rushed my friend's wife into the emergency room with what turned out to be an ectopic pregnancy. She needed attention quickly and they performed an emergency surgery. I know this is the type of thing Justin is talking about.
The practical effect of these laws is that physicians and medical facilities will potentially face severe legal consequences for removing a dead or non-viable fetus and no legal consequences for allowing a woman to die.
So if you are a physician or the board of a medical facility, which sword are you going to fall on? Loss of licensure and potentially prison? Or civil liability for which you carry malpractice insurance and which these laws may actually mitigate in your favor anyway?
But tell me again there is no “war on women” or that SCOTUS doesn’t matter enough to vote for the pantsuit lady.
Those of us living in secular hospital deserts have been living this hell for years. At Adventist, a patient of mine was even asked if she had her husband’s permission to have her tubes tied. In this nearly 4000 square mile county, due to an Adventist monopoly there is no option for pregnancy termination at all. Women’s autonomy has been irreparably damaged even in blue states where religious monopolies are allowed. People blue states seem to think this doesn’t affect them. Wrong. Looking at you Gavin Newsom and the Democratic Assembly and Democratic State Senate….
I am way past chid-bearing age, but it terrifies me that my closest hospitals are all Catholic. Am not sure they would give mr a morphine pump like my Mom got when she was in terminal heart failure.😣🤬
This essay certainly has more credibility than Justin’s testimonials pertaining to US Middle East Foreign Policy.
Republicans will never outlaw condoms. If they did, far too many wives (and a few children) of legislators will develop sexually transmitted diseases. Can't let the secrets out in the open.