Roe v. Wade.

[Demon]

Roe v Wade didn’t go far enough- it was under right to privacy. It should have been under something more solid and that’s partly why we are where we are now.

Well that, and a less divided court...

 

[swingtime]

Agreed-they keep playing by the rules while everyone else is cheating.

Yes, Democrats need to stop bringing a teddy bear to a gunfight. The folks who brought us the Dobbs decision disregard norms. For them, it is about power. And they've been playing the long game. Clarence Thomas was confirmed to the Supreme Court in ’91. Alito was sworn in in 2006.

Now the Supreme Court is going to hear a case re state legislatures’ power over elections. Back in 2010, they flipped the state legislatures – long game.

 

[Demon]

Yes, Democrats need to stop bringing a teddy bear to a gunfight. The folks who brought us the Dobbs decision disregard norms. For them, it is about power. And they've been playing the long game. Clarence Thomas was confirmed to the Supreme Court in ’91. Alito was sworn in in 2006.

Now the Supreme Court is going to hear a case re state legislatures’ power over elections. Back in 2010, they flipped the state legislatures – long game.

And i would bet this court agrees with the state legislatures.

 

[Calliecake]

And i would bet this court agrees with the state legislatures.

I also think the court will agree with the state legislatures.

I feel like I’m living in a completely different county than the one I lived in 10 years ago.

 

[Calliecake]

A few things I find dehumanizing:

treating woman as brood mares;
treating babies like commodities ala Comey-Barrett's statement that the surplus of babies is low for those who want to adopt so we need to increase the surplus;
deputizing citizens to spy on one another and offering bounties for reporting abortions;
jailing women for having miscarrriages;
citizen intrusion into private medical care;
the heinous dehumanization of raped women by those elected to represent them.

We can add Yesli Vega to the list of Matata’s idiots above.

Another person (who hasn’t been identified) said it is harder for women to become pregnant if they are raped.

Vega’s replied with “Well, maybe because there’s so much going on in the body. I don’t know. I haven’t, you know, seen any studies. But if I’m processing what you’re saying, it wouldn’t surprise me”. she responded “Because it’s not something that’s happening organically. You’re forcing it. The individual, the male, is doing it quickly. It‘s not like, you know - and so I can see why there is truth to that. It’s unfortunate“


There is no evidence to back up claims that women who have been raped are less likely to become pregnant, According to a 1996 study from the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, an estimated 32,101 pregnancies result from rape each year.

 

[LightBright]

Please post it on the COVID thread too.
Mandates rob people of choice.

Exactly. I feel strongly that medical autonomy is a necessary freedom. No one should legislate medical decisions. Both sides of the aisle don’t acknowledge that this is the same fundamental right.

 

[Ella]

Folks, no name calling or we will give out time outs. Keep it clean.

 

[Kalynna]

I've also been doom scrolling through here. Someone asked why there are so many personal anecdotes and emotional stories - I think that personal stories are important because it shows that one unified policy will not appropriately respond to all situations when we're dealing with an issue as sensitive and varied as bodily autonomy. Yes, it seems reasonable on its face to compromise and have a ban on abortions past a certain point in time; but it has also been pointed out that the vast majority of late term abortions are necessary due to medical complications. These are often time-sensitive situations and I think that it should be left to medical professionals and their patients to decide what to do in those situations, and not have oversight by some government panel.

For the "shout your abortion" point - I don't really see the problem. It is important to destigmatize abortion as stigma and misunderstanding is a major reason why we're in this situation in the first place. As said above, there are many reasons why people CHOOSE to get abortions. It's a part of life that will not go away, with or without bans. And a lot of times, the choice to get one is actually a relief and not a traumatic, morally wrought experience.

As a lawyer, I'm appalled at this decision because of the complete disrespect for stare decisis. This is a fundamental bedrock of the American legal system and could throw everything into chaos. Yes, the concept of substantive due process is convoluted, but so are many other decisions that expand rights past what is explicitly written in the constitution, including recent expansions of Second Amendment rights.

I'm also horrified at the lengths some states are going to to prevent their citizens from obtaining abortions. Some states are looking to prevent their citizens from traveling to obtain abortions; I can't imagine the level of surveillance that will be required to enact this. Additionally, these plans do harken back to 'runaway slave' laws which is utterly disgusting.

The legal schemes that promote "ratting out" people who seek or provide abortions are downright Stalinist. I have studied the Great Terror under Stalin and can guarantee we do NOT want to promote those tactics in this country.

I also have no idea how these legislators think that their state courts will have jurisdiction over people in other states who aid in providing an abortion. That's a scary overreach which completely goes against state sovereignty, and anyone who truly believes in States' Rights should be appalled.

I know that worrying about the "slippery slope" is a logical fallacy, but the repercussions of this decision are staring us in the face and I don't think we can ignore them. Congress has already shown that it is impossible to pass legislation codifying Roe on a federal level, and I highly doubt they'll be able to save any other rights that are stripped away. Plus the Court has set its sights on voting procedures, which is truly scary, especially after this "stolen election" nonsense.

I see dark days ahead for this country, and I am personally looking for a way to leave my state, or perhaps the country itself before things get even worse.

 

[Calliecake]

Thank you for the above post @Kalynna.

It will interesting to see how this ruling affects couples going thru IVF. it’s seems their hopes and dreams also have the possibility of being taken away.

I couldn’t agree more about the personal anecdotes and stories being needed to put a spot light on how this will affect women differently and how womens needs change at different times of their lives. We are all human. Stories need to be told. This is life. Life isn’t perfect. Unfortunately there aren’t pretty pink bows tied around every situation in life. There can be times that can be messy, hard, dark and ugly. Often it’s the difficult times in our lives that give us our very best attributes, like compassion and empathy. Many of us know the pain this ruling can bring to peoples lives. That’s what has been so hard to accept with this ruling.

I apologize for some of the venting and raging I’ve done on this thread the past week. It would have been much better to state how I felt in a calm manner. I’m sure my thoughts could have been better expressed by waiting and posting while not being so emotional, hurt and angry by this ruling.

 

[monarch64]

I can’t: I’m in IN and it’s gonna go the way it’s gonna go no matter how hard I bang my fists against the capital building, you know?

I voted. I’ll continue to vote! I’ll always vote

In a minute Imma need a sentimental man or woman to pump me up

It’s about damn time

 

[m-cubed]

And now the trigger laws are preventing women from getting first line treatments for autoimmune diseases such as methotrexate because the drug (which is also a cancer treatment) can be used as an abortifacient. Many of the drugs which are used to induce spontaneous abortion have other indications, both as care after a spontaneous miscarriage as well as indications totally separate from reproductive healthcare. Politicians are not doctors and do not belong inserting themselves between patients and their doctors. Women are more than just wombs and cannot have healthcare denied because some politician doesn’t like a potential use of a drug. This is absolutely disgusting.

Arthritis Foundation Statement on Methotrexate Access | Arthritis Foundation

Supreme Court ruling on Roe v. Wade has impact on access to methotrexate. Read what the Arthritis Foundation is doing to protect arthritis patients.

www.arthritis.org

 

[m-cubed]

And now the trigger laws are preventing women from getting first line treatments for autoimmune diseases such as methotrexate because the drug (which is also a cancer treatment) can be used as an abortifacient. Many of the drugs which are used to induce spontaneous abortion have other indications, both as care after a spontaneous miscarriage as well as indications totally separate from reproductive healthcare. Politicians are not doctors and do not belong inserting themselves between patients and their doctors. Women are more than just wombs and cannot have healthcare denied because some politician doesn’t like a potential use of a drug. This is absolutely disgusting.

Arthritis Foundation Statement on Methotrexate Access | Arthritis Foundation

Supreme Court ruling on Roe v. Wade has impact on access to methotrexate. Read what the Arthritis Foundation is doing to protect arthritis patients.

www.arthritis.org

Edit: sorry, meant to say “elective abortion” rather than “spontaneous abortion.”

 

[Snowdrop13]

And now the trigger laws are preventing women from getting first line treatments for autoimmune diseases such as methotrexate because the drug (which is also a cancer treatment) can be used as an abortifacient. Many of the drugs which are used to induce spontaneous abortion have other indications, both as care after a spontaneous miscarriage as well as indications totally separate from reproductive healthcare. Politicians are not doctors and do not belong inserting themselves between patients and their doctors. Women are more than just wombs and cannot have healthcare denied because some politician doesn’t like a potential use of a drug. This is absolutely disgusting.

Arthritis Foundation Statement on Methotrexate Access | Arthritis Foundation

Supreme Court ruling on Roe v. Wade has impact on access to methotrexate. Read what the Arthritis Foundation is doing to protect arthritis patients.

www.arthritis.org

It would make you weep, all this, really. Women on methotrexate are not supposed to get pregnant as the drug causes fetal abnormalities. It is also a drug with some horrible side effects. I can’t believe the two situations are being equated here. Implying that women don’t have any intelligence and also that doctors are all bl**dy stupid.

 

[missy]

I never thought that our children and grandchildren would have fewer rights than us. And as women we would be further reduced, marginalized and removed from the decisions that affect our own body and person. We are nothing but incubators and second class citizens in the states where abortion is banned.

In the span of 36 hours, women were told that the right to carry a firearm is more important than their ability to get proper health care. The stark contrast of these two issues is incredible.

Women will still get abortions but it will be less safe. If anyone here remembers the time before Roe. It was scary, unsafe and unacceptable. This decision harms women who lack resources and access to health care. This decision affects those who can least afford it.

This is wrong morally and medically.
It is the woman’s body. Her right to choose. Period.

We are in the freaking Handmaiden’s Tale.

 

[missy]

"

'Would You Like to Keep This Pregnancy?' I Asked My 13-Year-Old Patient​

— Having a choice can help end cycles of poverty among marginalized teen patients​

by Mengyi “Zed” Zha, MD

"Dr. Zha, for the new OB initial visit I put on your schedule next week, is it possible to schedule the patient with you sooner?" the OB coordinator asked me.
"Why is that?" I responded, as there is usually no urgency for this type of visit.
"Well, she is only 13. And she didn't sound excited about this pregnancy. It's better if you talk to her about her options sooner rather than later."

This was one of my first new OB patients at my current job as a family medicine physician with obstetrics at a federally qualified health center in rural Washington that serves a predominantly Latinx migrant worker population. As I would come to find out, teen pregnancies are not uncommon in my patient population, similar to other marginalized groups. In 2006, 127 per 1,000 Hispanic teens (ages 15-19) became pregnant, nearly double the national rate. As of 2019, the birth rate among Hispanic teens ages 15-19 was over two times higher than the rate for white teens. Considering the disparities in education and income levels between the two groups, this is hardly surprising.
And before some readers argue that teen pregnancy and intentional young parenthood is just a "cultural thing" in certain populations, it's worth pointing out that according to national data, Hispanic people of child-bearing age have much higher rates of unintended pregnancy than their white counterparts. Women of color and undocumented immigrants are also at greater risk for rape. Expectedly, Hispanic people who are pregnant are twice as likely to undergo abortions than white people.

Teen pregnancy and births are extremely costly in several aspects. Teen births result in a substantial dropout rate from high school. The children of teen mothers have more health problems and lower school achievement, and are more likely to become incarcerated, unemployed, or teenage parents themselves. It's a vicious cycle of poverty that bleeds into multiple generations. This is not just a problem for teens of color, but a national issue for young people of all backgrounds: while the teen birth rate has been decreasing in the U.S. over the past 3 decades, it is still the highest among western industrialized countries.
Overall, about 29% of pregnancies among 15 to 19-year-olds end in abortion in the U.S. (2013). This means access to legal and safe abortion has been an important way to end the cycle of poverty for teens of color, who already experience more barriers to healthcare. Among my patient population, living in a rural location adds even greater challenges.

After confirming my 13-year-old new OB patient's pregnancy was not a result of rape, I asked her on our confidential phone call, "Would you like to keep this pregnancy?" Her answer made it clear that this was an unintended and unwanted pregnancy. In Washington, minors have the legal right to terminate their pregnancy without parental permission. So, we helped her make an appointment with the nearest Planned Parenthood, which was over an hour away by car. Luckily, we were able to provide resources to help her overcome language barriers and transportation difficulties.
On June 24, 2022, the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. This decision will likely lead roughly half the states to ban abortion. Without a doubt, my Hispanic teen patient population -- among other marginalized communities -- will be disproportionately impacted.
"What do you want to be when you grow up?" I frequently ask my teenage patients during well-child checks. A few months after my 13-year-old patient underwent medical abortion, I had the opportunity to ask her this exact question during her own well-child visit.

"I want to go to college so my parents don't have to work in the fields," she said, without hesitation.
This is a goal I hear a lot. Sometimes young patients will say this to me in English, while their exhausted, dirty, and extremely sun-burned parents who just finished working in the orchards or the farms sit quietly in the corner of the exam room. Without fully understanding what we're saying, the parents smile at me as their eyes fill with tears and their hearts with pride.
"Alright!" I cheer whenever I hear such an answer. In these moments, I am reminded of my own childhood where my parents would "break the wok to sell the scrap metal" (a saying in Chinese indicating to give away all one has to achieve something) in order to support my education and turn the fate of my family around.

We simply cannot ensure healthy and educated futures for our teens, especially those who carry the hopes and dreams of their already marginalized families, without providing them the vital tools to break the cycle of poverty. And the access to abortion is one of these tools.
Mengyi "Zed" Zha, MD, is a family medicine doctor in Washington State and a nonfiction writer.

 

[missy]

"
Two Americas After the Fall of Roe
— There will be severe consequences for women's health and the doctor-patient relationship

by Lawrence O. Gostin, JD, and Rebecca Reingold

A photo of pro choice and pro life protestors clashing in front of the US Supreme Court building in Washington, DC.
On Friday, the Supreme Court in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization overturned its landmark abortion decisions in Roe v. Wade (1973) and Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992), which established a constitutional right to abortion before fetal viability. Reversing a half-century of precedent, it is the first time the Supreme Court has withdrawn a right that Americans have relied upon. The unprecedented leaked opinion and the blatant disregard for well-settled precedent undermines the Court's legitimacy and the public's trust in its impartiality.


Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the majority, held the Constitution neither explicitly or implicitly protects the right to abortion. Alito argued that the right to privacy is not "deeply rooted" in the country's history and not essential to "ordered liberty." Using a constrained constitutional interpretation, he went back to 1868 when the 14th amendment was adopted, saying abortion was a crime in most states. But at the time, women also could not vote and had little voice.

Justice Alito also stressed that abortion should be left "to the people and their elected representatives." In other words, states now have the power to protect, ban, or regulate access to abortion, with vast geographic variability. Abortion rights and access will depend entirely on where a person lives.

With the fall of Roe and rise of highly variable laws, the emerging reality of "Two Americas" will only become more evident, as women in about half the country face severe health consequences and health professionals navigate the major erosion of the doctor-patient relationship.


Abortion in a Post-Roe World

Roughly half of all states have already banned or are poised to ban nearly all abortions. Some abortion bans offer no exception for rape, incest, or nonfatal health risks. More than half of women of reproductive age (58%) are likely to lose the right to abortion. Some women may access abortion medication through telehealth appointments or the internet. Others will have to travel hundreds of miles to receive abortion care. Many will be unable to receive abortion services altogether due to hardships that prevent women from traveling long distances, including taking time off from work, finding childcare, and covering travel costs.

Almost a third of all states have laws explicitly protecting the right to abortion -- four throughout pregnancy and 12 prior to fetal viability. Some states have enhanced access by requiring health plans to cover abortion or provide state funds, expanding physician eligibility to provide abortions, and protecting pregnant women and those who assist them from legal actions. In short, while many states are criminalizing abortions, others are declaring themselves abortion sanctuaries. The cultural and geographic divisions in America aren't going away.

Health Professionals

Bans in roughly half of all states subject health professionals to a range of penalties, including large fines (up to $10,000) or suspension of medical licenses. More concerning for health professionals, however, are the lengthy prison sentences. Texas can enforce a maximum penalty of life imprisonment, and 11 other states would impose penalties of up to 10 to 15 years.

Threats of prosecution will have a profound effect on the physician-patient relationship. While even the most extreme abortion bans include exceptions for the pregnant woman's life, some do not include nonfatal risks. The line between the risks to health and life is often gray in practice, leaving health professionals to potentially face harsh penalties. It is often unclear what exactly "lifesaving" means. What does the risk of death have to be, and how imminent must it be?

Moreover, abortion and miscarriage are often clinically indistinguishable. Over 1 million women experience miscarriage each year. Many women require treatments to avoid complications that threaten their health or lives, which can include treatments used for abortion care. Given the overlap in presentation of and treatment for abortion and miscarriage, many health professionals may hesitate to treat or stop treating pregnancy loss altogether.


Health professionals may be forced to make agonizing choices, between upholding their ethical obligations and following the law. They may also be caught between conflicting legal obligations, as many states have laws prohibiting health professionals from abandoning their patients. The federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) requires hospitals that offer emergency services to provide a medical screening and treatment, including active labor.

Training for health providers in states with abortion bans will also change, with far fewer opportunities to learn "non-lifesaving" abortion care or even miscarriage management. An important predictor of a physician's ability to provide the full range of miscarriage-management options is having had abortion care training as a resident. The resulting shrinking workforce for abortion and pregnancy loss services could have far-reaching consequences for maternal and infant health outcomes. Health professionals may also be unable to counsel patients honestly.

Women

As the dissenting opinion observes, the reversal of Roe and Casey will have "life-altering consequences." Abortion bans will result in negative physical health outcomes for women who are delayed in accessing abortion services or unable to access them altogether. Delaying abortions beyond the first trimester significantly increases health risks. Women who have difficulty accessing safe, legal abortions may turn to unsafe, clandestine abortions without expert medical oversight. For some women, pregnancy and childbirth can result in life-altering health problems or even death. Women also face challenges to their mental health and emotional well-being, as they are forced to choose between an unsafe abortion or carrying an unwanted pregnancy to term. Women fearing legal consequences as they weigh their options may hide their pregnancies and avoid prenatal care. That, in turn, risks the health of newborns.

Equity

While women's health and bodily integrity are prominent concerns, equity and justice are also at stake. Abortion bans will disproportionately affect underserved and marginalized women, including those living in poverty or rural areas, those from ethnic and racial minority groups, young individuals, the undocumented, and those who experience intimate partner violence.

Women living below the poverty line experience unintended pregnancies at rates five times higher than higher-income women, and approximately 75% of women who have abortions have incomes near or below the federal poverty line. Women who have abortions also disproportionately work in jobs with low wages and little flexibility. Medicaid recipients, which includes 19% of all women of reproductive age, must pay out of pocket because federal funding of abortion is prohibited under the Hyde Amendment.

Most patients seeking abortion services are from ethnic and racial minority groups: an estimated 81% in Mississippi, 79% in Georgia, and 75% in Texas. They are already more likely to lack health insurance. Bans on abortion would likely increase pregnancy-related deaths, and Black women are three times more likely than White women to die of pregnancy-related causes.


Young adults and adolescents, who are less likely to have a steady source of income, account for 72% of patients who seek abortion services. Survivors of intimate partner violence, which affects nearly 1 in 3 women, experience disproportionately high rates of forced pregnancy. They also encounter barriers to abortion services due to abusive partners.

We are seeing "Two Americas," one where abortions are fully protected and one where they are criminalized. And the exercise of a constitutional right once held dear will depend fundamentally on whether a woman has the means to travel for reproductive health services.

Other Rights Are at Stake

Justice Alito wrote, "we emphasize that our decision concerns the constitutional right to abortion and no other right." But the entire edifice of privacy rights is built on the right to due process under the 14th amendment. Rights to contraception, same-sex marriage, and same-sex intimacy rest on that right to privacy. And none of those rights were deeply rooted in the nation's history, dating back to 1868. Justice Clarence Thomas, in his concurrence, said as much: "We have a duty to correct the errors in those precedents." Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan in dissent put it even more bluntly: "Either the mass of the majority's opinion is hypocrisy, or additional constitutional rights are under threat. It is one or the other."

Lawrence O. Gostin, JD, is a University Professor, Georgetown University's highest academic rank, where he directs the O'Neill Institute for National & Global Health Law. He is also director of the World Health Organization Collaborating Center on National & Global Health Law. He is the author of the book, Global Health Security: A Blueprint for the Future. Rebecca Reingold, JD,is Associate Director of the Health and Human Rights Initiative at the O'Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law.

"

 

[adlgel]

to @nala and those who support the belief that some abortions are ok but others need to be banned - how would you feel about facing criminal charges for not being willing to give your bone marrow or a kidney (you can live with only one) to a stranger who is dying? Or not agreeing to be an organ donor upon your death?

If you feel that no one person or legislative body has the right to require you to take these types of actions to save another precious life, then why do any of the "but there must be limits" arguments apply to abortion. If it's okay for you to not do something and your not doing that something contributes to or results in another person's death how is that any different than an abortion at any stage of the pregnancy?

I agree with earlier posters who say that ultimately this is about bodily autonomy. Either we have it or we don't and if we have it it has to be unilateral. Right now the only people who are losing their bodily autonomy are women. So the argument that this is about saving a precious life is completely fallacious. Otherwise we'd all be required to sign up for the bone marrow registry and be an organ donor because as others noted, there are lots of lives that could be saved that way.

 

[Jambalaya]

This decision harms women who lack resources and access to health care. This decision affects those who can least afford it.

EXACTLY!

It's people of limited means who are the most affected, as is the case with many laws. That's why those of us with more resources have to use them to stick up for the less fortunate, since they usually have less time and fewer resources to organize resistance themselves. Most have a full-time job on their hands just trying to survive.

 

[telephone89]

to @nala and those who support the belief that some abortions are ok but others need to be banned - how would you feel about facing criminal charges for not being willing to give your bone marrow or a kidney (you can live with only one) to a stranger who is dying? Or not agreeing to be an organ donor upon your death?

If you feel that no one person or legislative body has the right to require you to take these types of actions to save another precious life, then why do any of the "but there must be limits" arguments apply to abortion. If it's okay for you to not do something and your not doing that something contributes to or results in another person's death how is that any different than an abortion at any stage of the pregnancy?

I agree with earlier posters who say that ultimately this is about bodily autonomy. Either we have it or we don't and if we have it it has to be unilateral. Right now the only people who are losing their bodily autonomy are women. So the argument that this is about saving a precious life is completely fallacious. Otherwise we'd all be required to sign up for the bone marrow registry and be an organ donor because as others noted, there are lots of lives that could be saved that way.

Absolutely.
I read a quote somewhat recently that said women in the US (some states) currently have less autonomy than a corpse.

They cannot force a corpse to give up their organs. They can force a woman to keep a pregnancy. Organs from a person who is no longer alive that would save multiple people cannot be forced. But carrying a pregnancy that may end up killing them both is totally fine. How f-cked.

 

[Arcadian]

One of my neices decided she doesn't want to ever have this over her head and has scheduled a tubaligation.

Her normal dr has already said no, because she never had kids. She fired him. I talked to her about this and she told me that there's no way she wants to bring a kid into this world especially not living in the US.

I don't doubt that more women will be trying to find options to this. Its unfortunate and invasive but she's 30 and an adult who has to do whats best for herself.

 

[nala]

Does anyone have 100 percent bodily autonomy? Like. Don’t they lock you up when your are suicidal? 50/50 hold? And some of you arguing that pregnancy definition don’t matter—don’t matter if it’s a baby or a parasite—well—kind of does bc then it’s no longer a choice Just about your body but about the other one you are carrying.
And to those of you calling me out—I don’t care to quote you—bc tbh—keep it general—I never said I’m against abortions and some of you all aren’t reading closely what I’m saying. I just have a lot of thoughts. Is it ok to have thoughts these days? And before you answer—it’s a rhetorical question. I honestly do feel bad for many of you who feel so devastated and like leaving the country bc of this. Like. So many other issues and this… this is what makes you feel so disheartened? This is fixable. Move to another state or don’t move and vote. Not the end of the world.

Now you know how men feel when they have sex. They don’t know if they will knock women up and if they do, if they will have to be a father, child support provider, or have zero choice about the kid. Guess we are now in their shoes. Have you guys ever called men breeding stallions and cried for their lack of rights when it comes to female’s reproductive health? For those of you comparing women to brood mares? We all have choices. Let’s just proceed with caution.

 

[telephone89]

Does anyone have 100 percent bodily autonomy? Like. Don’t they lock you up when your are suicidal? 50/50 hold? And some of you arguing that pregnancy definition don’t matter—don’t matter if it’s a baby or a parasite—well—kind of does bc then it’s no longer a choice Just about your body but about the other one you are carrying.
And to those of you calling me out—I don’t care to quote you—bc tbh—keep it general—I never said I’m against abortions and some of you all aren’t reading closely what I’m saying. I just have a lot of thoughts. Is it ok to have thoughts these days? And before you answer—it’s a rhetorical question. I honestly do feel bad for many of you who feel so devastated and like leaving the country bc of this. Like. So many other issues and this… this is what makes you feel so disheartened? This is fixable. Move to another state or don’t move and vote. Not the end of the world.

Now you know how men feel when they have sex. They don’t know if they will knock women up and if they do, if they will have to be a father, child support provider, or have zero choice about the kid. Guess we are now in their shoes. Have you guys ever called men breeding stallions and cried for their lack of rights when it comes to female’s reproductive health? For those of you comparing women to brood mares? We all have choices. Let’s just proceed with caution.

Now you know how men feel when they have sex.

Wow what a bizarre misogynistic comment. You are angry that people don’t think you’re pro-choice enough but literally shit all over your friends who had one, under the guise of ‘well I didn’t judge’ but obviously you did, and continue to.

Funny how you decided not to respond to many of the comments calling out your trolling but just try and swoop in with some ‘profound’ (in your mind apparently) comment. It’s gross and maybe YOU should try some logic.

 

[Calliecake]

@nala, If men don’t want to become fathers they are capable of wearing a condom. My guess is most men who find out they impregnated a woman were not using protection when they had sex (and I am well aware condoms can break). Birth control can fail. It’s why we need safe and legal abortions. Please know I’m not giving you a hard time, nor am I thinking of leaving the country. I happen to feel that all women should have control over their own bodies. The government should not be involved in this. This should be a decision made by a woman and her doctor.

Ohio refused to perform an abortion on a 10 year old. She was taken to Indiana to have an abortion. What kind of person thinks it’s fine for a 10 year old to go thru a pregnancy and give birth? We live in a sick country.

 

[nala]

Now you know how men feel when they have sex.

Wow what a bizarre misogynistic comment. You are angry that people don’t think you’re pro-choice enough but literally shit all over your friends who had one, under the guise of ‘well I didn’t judge’ but obviously you did, and continue to.

Funny how you decided not to respond to many of the comments calling out your trolling but just try and swoop in with some ‘profound’ (in your mind apparently) comment. It’s gross and maybe YOU should try some logic.

Funny how you care about what you think I think. Lol. Put me on ignore if you think I’m trolling—it makes no difference to me.

 

[Calliecake]

@Arcadian, Doctors should be expecting to hear this request from their patients. Seriously who would risk getting pregnant now if they were certain they did not want children? This happened to a friend of mine around 35 years ago. She always knew she didn’t want to have children. I had no idea this was still happening today. But then again we have Wisconsin trying to put a law in place from 1849 regarding abortion. Nothing is surprising anymore.

 

[GeliL]

I haven't seen anything that obstructs a man's body autonomy to impregnate a woman. I haven't seen anything done to reduce rape, so I'd say men have plenty of body autonomy.

Sex comes with a risk of pregnancy where both parties can be burdened, but more burden definitely lies on the woman instead of the man. Being forced to provide child support is much better than having to go through 9 months of pregnancy, child birth, have various physical and mental stress on top of having to raise a child that the woman did not even want. Yet nothing is done to prevent the man from knocking up a woman, and no law was passed to give the father more responsibilities for raising the child, I don't see how that can not be seen as a power imbalance.

Going out of state has its own problems. These out of state abortion clinics can become swamped and unable to handle more patients, the wait times can be long, and it may be expensive if medical insurance doesn't cover out of state expenses. Not everyone is previleged enough to afford that, and if they can't afford that, they can't afford to take care of a child.

Another way of looking at abortion is that instead of overloading the earth with abandoned babies we should focus on the current quality of life. Animals sometimes eat their own babies for sustainability, and that's after birth too and no one bats an eye at that. They do it for their environment and for the preservation of their species, so it's just natural to want to have babies and natural to want an abortion. Limiting one or the other is just dragging us down.

 

[nala]

I’m done with this thread. Wish you all the best.I’m really not trying to disturb anyone and it’s too laborious to reply to all the essays written here. Back to looking at bling.

 

[Arcadian]

@Arcadian, Doctors should be expecting to hear this request from their patients. Seriously who would risk getting pregnant now if they were certain they did not want children? This happened to a friend of mine around 35 years ago. She always knew she didn’t want to have children. I had no idea this was still happening today. But then again we have Wisconsin trying to put a law in place from 1849 regarding abortion. Nothing is surprising anymore.

It seems that plenty have. https://www.thedailybeast.com/dobbs...os-sends-women-racing-to-get-their-tubes-tied

My niece lives in Missouri so I can't say I blame her. One who had 3 kids already had to tell her dr she'll just go to someone else to do it if they couldn't. seriously its not their business why its wanted but you know, gotta save women from themselves....

 

[Calliecake]

It seems that plenty have. https://www.thedailybeast.com/dobbs...os-sends-women-racing-to-get-their-tubes-tied

My niece lives in Missouri so I can't say I blame her. One who had 3 kids already had to tell her dr she'll just go to someone else to do it if they couldn't. seriously its not their business why its wanted but you know, gotta save women from themselves....

My guess is if she were a man requesting a vasectomy there would be no questions asked and the surgery would be scheduled.

 

[starbrite]

This is an admittedly pathetic response to this heartfelt and poignant post - but starbrite, thank you. And I’m sorry.

Thank you, yssie. Your comment concerning my post means a lot to me. I’ve had a very difficult time processing this past week.

I’ll never understand why I am now considered a second-class citizen solely because of where I live. When SCOTUS made their decision, those striking down Roe v. Wade knew this would happen in the Red States. That was those 5 justices' end game... for now. If I (and other women like me) lived in a Blue State, we'd still be entitled to basic human rights. At least for a while longer.

I'm now not really optimistic about the future.

As America celebrates another Independence Day, I feel like I am suddenly existing in a totally different country than the one in which I was born. I’ve reflected on this for a week now, and each day, the future looks more uncertain and scarier than the day before.

There hasn’t been a day in the past week when something almost unbelievable hasn't happened that dramatically effects those who live here. First abortion rights; then voting rights. A couple of days after the abortion ban went into effect, the governor signed in a new law that will put additional restrictions on voting. This state already had some of the most restrictive voting laws in the nation. Nevertheless, things went from bad to worse: a lot worse. The new state voting law will probably make their way up to the Supreme Court. Based on SCOTUS overturning Roe, I think we know how that will also end.