Roe v. Wade.

[Lookinagain]

Exactly. What I don't understand is this--conservatives want women to give their babies up for adoption instead of having abortions. But who pays for the cost of labor and delivery? Is the state going to cover those costs? Will churches pay? How are uninsured women going to afford that kind of expense? It cost 30,000 to have a baby in the United States ten years ago. I paid 3,000 because I had insurance. How are uninsured women going to come up with 30,000 to give birth?

Well, I think it's beyond that. All these babies won't be adopted for one reason or another, hell, there will be millions of them if no one can have an abortion. Some will be healthy, some won't. And many of the women forced to have these children won't give them up for adoption. So all these conservatives, who don't like taxes, better get ready to pay more taxes to pay for all these children that mothers, who can't afford them, are forced against their will to have. Unless these conservatives are happy to let these children live homeless or starve. So much for protecting them. Apparently the fertilized egg has more rights than the actual child walking on the earth. It's just totally crazy. Don't they think of the long term results?

 

[Calliecake]

It's actually everyone's eventually, but right now it's women's health. Tomorrow autonomy, be it financial or something else. I feel like I've gone back 50 years in time and that we have to start all over again to gain the rights we fought for in the 70's.

It feels like we are going back to 1970 all over again. The only difference is we won’t be legalizing abortion for the entire country 3 years from now.

Next they will go after Plan B, birth control and gay marriage.

 

[ItsMainelyYou]

conservatives want women to give their babies up for adoption instead of having abortions.

No, they actually don't, most times we hear about women doing what is asked by giving up their baby at a designated location, they will try to find and chase the mother down to return the child to her. I've heard several news stories where this happens. The dirty undercurrent is this with it's racist underpinning: If you ask certain fundamentalist evangelicals for example, the mother should be punished by raising the baby with no support for her wages of sin. They also want white babies specifically to bolster rank for their Great Replacement Theory for a theocratic nation. They are not above forcing any white woman to be unwilling incubators if they can find a way to do it. It sounds crazy, but it is actually what they believe and they have no compunction admitting to that. They mean it. There are more of them than you'd imagine.

Well, I think it's beyond that. All these babies won't be adopted for one reason or another, hell, there will be millions of them if no one can have an abortion. Some will be healthy, some won't. And many of the women forced to have these children won't give them up for adoption. So all these conservatives, who don't like taxes, better get ready to pay more taxes to pay for all these children that mothers, who can't afford them, are forced against their will to have. Unless these conservatives are happy to let these children live homeless or starve. So much for protecting them. Apparently the fertilized egg has more rights than the actual child walking on the earth. It's just totally crazy. Don't they think of the long term results?

We've seen what they will do, because they've already showed us their level of care for immigrant children by putting them in cages, denying them soap and had the audacity to call them concentration centers(Spicer)
They will do nothing to help them. This is the real truth behind 'Cadillac Queens' smear. They already cut social programs to the bone purposefully and continually- the poorest, most destitute citizens in our country are all single mothers with young children. They are meant to starve. They are meant to suffer. It is a very effective, insidious, ruthless means of control.
The cruelty is the point.

 

[mommylawyer]

No, they actually don't, most times we hear about women doing what is asked by giving up their baby at a designated location, they will try to find and chase the mother down to return the child to her. I've heard several news stories where this happens. The dirty undercurrent is this with it's racist underpinning: If you ask certain fundamentalist evangelicals for example, the mother should be punished by raising the baby with no support for her wages of sin. They also want white babies specifically to bolster rank for their Great Replacement Theory for a theocratic nation. They are not above forcing any white woman to be unwilling incubators if they can find a way to do it. It sounds crazy, but it is actually what they believe and they have no compunction admitting to that. They mean it. There are more of them then you'd imagine.

We've seen what they will do, because they've already showed us their level of care for immigrant children by putting them in cages, denying them soap and had the audacity to call them concentration centers(Spicer)
They will do nothing to help them. This is the real truth behind 'Cadillac Queens' smear. They already cut social programs to the bone purposefully and continually- the poorest, most destitute citizens in our country are all single mothers with young children. They are meant to starve. They are meant to suffer. It is a very effective, insidious, ruthless means of control.
The cruelty is the point.

How horrible!

 

[whitewave]

It's really sad. I am currently living in a third-world country and things are better here for women. Birth control pills are OTC, healthcare is affordable, and abortions are safe and available.

We need universal health care in the USA. It’s way past time.

 

[fel]

I suggest you all read or listen to https://www.amazon.com/How-Civil-Wars-Start-Stop/dp/0593137787

This country is going into an autocracy. It may be unstoppable at this point. We will all know in a few years.

 

[Lookinagain]

I'm digressing a bit here but I'm not a constitutional law scholar and my con law class was over 40 years ago. I wonder if anyone reading this thread can tell me if there are other SCOTUS cases that diminish long held rights previously determined to be protected by the constitution. I don't mean denying newly asserted rights, but established rights later taken away. Nothing comes to my mind but again, it was 40 years ago that I took a Constitutional law class. That's the part about this whole thing that is so unbelievable to me so it got me to wondering if there are examples of this happening in the past. Typically we would see the SC expanding rights. Of course they did gut the Voting Rights Act. Any other examples you can point to where they are doing the same type of thing that they appear to be willing to do to R v.W?

 

[fel]

@Lookinagain Not exactly the same but Plessy v. Ferguson establishing "separate but equal" doctrine, removing rights that were offered via the 14th amendment.

*Not a lawyer, but attended a constitutional law class just for fun!

 

[whitewave]

Ok, I need to get off Twitter. They are saying that Amy on the court was saying that women need to have babies because there are women who want to adopt babies and there isn’t enough supply of this commodity.

I have so much rage about this I want (in my thoughts, not actions) to DO something about this. *no emoji exists for how mad I am*

edited to add: part of the quote is: the US needs a “domestic supply of infants”

These people are DISGUSTING

 

[Lookinagain]

@Lookinagain Not exactly the same but Plessy v. Ferguson establishing "separate but equal" doctrine, removing rights that were offered via the 14th amendment.

*Not a lawyer, but attended a constitutional law class just for fun!

I get that, but I guess I should have been more precise and asked if there was another SCOTUS case that reverses long held rights previously established by a prior SCOTUS case. Have they reversed their own precedents to diminish rights?
Plessy was used to interpret the 14th amendment as allowing separate but equal but I don't believe it was an actual reversal of a prior SC decision saying separate but equal was constitutional.

 

[fel]

@Lookinagain I don't think you will find another case like that because in the past justices respected stare decisis. Now it is just the wild west -- no rules, no respect for precedent. I believe the current majority will just do what they want going forward.

 

[Lookinagain]

@Lookinagain I don't think you will find another case like that because in the past justices respected stare decisis. Now it is just the wild west -- no rules, no respect for precedent. I believe the current majority will just do what they want going forward.

my point exactly. but i wanted to validate my thoughts that this has not happened in the past. These three recently appointed and sitting justices were all questioned about respect for precedent and they all bowed to it in one way or the other without truly committing to it, and now we see the result. I was frightened during each of their confirmation hearings and i guess my fear was justified.

I'm waiting to see if SCOTUS is booed the next time they appear somewhere for the public to see......I don't believe that has ever happened. But it should. The court has lost my respect. At least the majority of it has.

 

[Tonks]

I get that, but I guess I should have been more precise and asked if there was another SCOTUS case that reverses long held rights previously established by a prior SCOTUS case. Have they reversed their own precedents to diminish rights?
Plessy was used to interpret the 14th amendment as allowing separate but equal but I don't believe it was an actual reversal of a prior SC decision saying separate but equal was constitutional.

Like you it has been decades since I sat in con law. The only thing I can thing of that comes close is Korematsu v. US (the Japanese internment camps case).

 

[Calliecake]

@Tonks, I really want to thank you for yesterday.

 

[Matata]

@Lookinagain Found this:
As of 2020, the court had overruled its own precedents in an estimated 232 cases since 1810, says the library. To be sure, that list could be subject to interpretation, since it includes the Korematsu case from 1943, which justices have repudiated but never formally overturned.

A short list of overturned Supreme Court landmark decisions | Constitution Center

With the Supreme Court overruling Roe v. Wade, a look back at overturned landmark cases shows the rarity of such actions.

constitutioncenter.org

 

[lkredhat]

A slightly different opinion than many shared here....

This is a correct decision as the court should not have put that in place to begin with. This is a state level thing and needs to be treated as such. Every state should have or pass a law allowing or regulating as the elected officials see fit and the residents within each state should be able to vote those in who agree with their views. People are free to move or travel between states if they don't agree with what their state does. Or cross state lines to receive what they want and continue to live where they are and work for change. People have been doing that for the right to die with dignity already. It isn't perfect, but it is a better option IMHO than allowing such laws to be made by a handful of people at a national level.

A friend became pregnant at 17 and was in this situation pre Roe versus Wade. Oh, yeah, she was too young to vote as well.

She could not afford to travel out of state (well, several states) to get an abortion. I know you don't believe that, but in fact there are people who can't afford to take time off work; can't afford the plane ticket or bus fare; can't take time off to recover; can't take a few days off for an abortion because the man they are living with will know what they are up to and retaliate. Sadly, sometimes you need an abortion so you can escape a deadly relationship.

So, no abortion. She had the child, left the state to raise her, and went on welfare because the "father" was useless for child support. (He went on to have more children, of course.) Incredibly she was able to get a college degree and have a series of low-paid white collar jobs. But as you might suspect, as a single mother she could never save enough money for something as simple as a down-payment on a house and has little in retirement savings. She's in her 70s, has no home equity and keeps moving because the rent keeps going up. She's gone through another retraining and is looking for work ... a political job organizing for Democrats and women's rights.

I've asked her since--does she regret having her child? She loves her child, and is happy to have her in her life. But she'd give anything to have been able to provide better and not have teetered on the edge of poverty her entire life.

I might add--sometimes abortions are an absolute medical necessity (for example, ectopic pregnancies). For a state to make a law outlawing a medical procedure that saves lives--that is wrong, wrong, wrong.

 

[Bonfire]

Unbelievable


After abortion leak, Justice Thomas warns Supreme Court can't be 'bullied'
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/af...rns-supreme-court-cant-be-bullied-2022-05-06/

 

[Mayk]

Just curious for those who are at “rage” level Is there anything that causes you pause? (I am middle of road here) I support a women’s right to choose, I believe rape and incest are real reasons to terminate. I believe in medical choices for the mother’s safety (sadly having experienced a difficult decision myself for my medical safety).

Where I struggle is the woman standing on the corner with a sign that says ”I had 21 abortions”. I struggle with women who choose to use abortion as birth control. This is just so painful and personal for me. What I would not have given to have had a different outcome. And oh how I struggle now with the memories of my doctors’ opinions the agony of giving up and the complete sadness after. To this day sitting alone thinking about it will bring me to tears.

I have a friend who had an abortion in her early 20’s. Then when she got married was never able to conceive. She is 60 now and to this day it pains her.

There doesn’t seem to be any middle ground anywhere anymore and certainly not on this topic.

Try not to lop my head off. Just posing an opinion or a feeling that doesn’t really have an answer but I’m sure will anger some.

P.S. I’m adopted. Somehow I think this also casts a shadow on how I feel.

 

[Lookinagain]

@Lookinagain Found this:
As of 2020, the court had overruled its own precedents in an estimated 232 cases since 1810, says the library. To be sure, that list could be subject to interpretation, since it includes the Korematsu case from 1943, which justices have repudiated but never formally overturned.

A short list of overturned Supreme Court landmark decisions | Constitution Center

With the Supreme Court overruling Roe v. Wade, a look back at overturned landmark cases shows the rarity of such actions.

constitutioncenter.org

Thank you for that. I read through the cases listed quickly and it seems that most of them expanded rights, overturning prior cases that had limited rights. I think one of them could be read otherwise, but again, most overturned prior cases that had limited our rights. This expected decision coming out of the court will do just the opposite.

 

[mommylawyer]

Just curious for those who are at “rage” level Is there anything that causes you pause? (I am middle of road here) I support a women’s right to choose, I believe rape and incest are real reasons to terminate. I believe in medical choices for the mother’s safety (sadly having experienced a difficult decision myself for my medical safety).

Where I struggle is the woman standing on the corner with a sign that says ”I had 21 abortions”. I struggle with women who choose to use abortion as birth control. This is just so painful and personal for me. What I would have given to have had a different outcome And oh how I struggle now with the memories of my doctors’ opinions the agony of giving up and the complete sadness after. To this day sitting alone thinking about it will bring me to tears.

I have a friend who had an abortion in he early 20’s. Then when she got married was never able to conceive. She is 60 now and to this day it pains her.

There doesn’t seem to be any middle ground anywhere anymore and certainly not on this topic.

Try not to lop my head off. Just posing an opinion or a feeling that doesn’t really have an answer but I’m sure will anger some.

I agree that there needs to be a middle ground. You can't fight an extreme position by simply offering another extreme position as the alternative.

What I can't wrap my mind around is why we need the federal government to protect women's rights in the first place. Why are states attempting to oppress women in this day and age? It's just mind boggling.

 

[Gussie]

Just curious for those who are at “rage” level Is there anything that causes you pause? (I am middle of road here) I support a women’s right to choose, I believe rape and incest are real reasons to terminate. I believe in medical choices for the mother’s safety (sadly having experienced a difficult decision myself for my medical safety).

Where I struggle is the woman standing on the corner with a sign that says ”I had 21 abortions”. I struggle with women who choose to use abortion as birth control. This is just so painful and personal for me. What I would have given to have had a different outcome And oh how I struggle now with the memories of my doctors’ opinions the agony of giving up and the complete sadness after. To this day sitting alone thinking about it will bring me to tears.

I have a friend who had an abortion in he early 20’s. Then when she got married was never able to conceive. She is 60 now and to this day it pains her.

There doesn’t seem to be any middle ground anywhere anymore and certainly not on this topic.

Try not to lop my head off. Just posing an opinion or a feeling that doesn’t really have an answer but I’m sure will anger some.

I am sorry for your loss and for your friend's as well @Mayk.

I am one of the ones at rage level. RAGE.

I do understand your point about abortion as bc but I still don't see that as my business or the US government's business. Using abortion as bc is very sad to me; however, people should be free to make their own healthcare decisions without judgement. So long as the pregnancy is under the time of viability (20 weeks), it should be the woman's decision. Period. Legislating morality does not work.

 

[Matata]

I support a women’s right to choose, I believe rape and incest are real reasons to terminate. I believe in medical choices for the mother’s safety (sadly having experienced a difficult decision myself for my medical safety).

Where I struggle is the woman standing on the corner with a sign that says ”I had 21 abortions”. I struggle with women who choose to use abortion as birth control.

I'm not sure a comfortable middle ground on such an emotional issue is possible. I look at it from 2 perspectives -- 1) no one should dictate what another does medically to his/her body and 2) abortion is a medical procedure; it is not, to me, the taking of a potential life.

Those women you speak of above are outliers. I would think the sign holder mentally unstable and the latter very rare. I can't imagine many woman putting themselves thorough multiple abortions when other methods are available. Imagine the physical and monetary cost. I knew one person who had 5 abortions. She had no answer to my question about why she didn't use birth control. She was troubled in other ways and would have been a lousy mother so I was relieved she never had a child.

Birth control can fail, people may choose not to raise a child they know will be born with a physical malady that will be financially untenable for the family and/or painful for the child. I think decisions to abort or not in these and all cases should be solely the decision of the woman and those she chooses to include in the decision making.

My rage is directed at the audacity of those who try to take personal power from women. I had a brief taste of that when I wanted a tubal ligation when I was in my mid-twenties. Five doctors would not do it without permission from my husband. I finally found one who would do it and I could breathe easier the rest of my life knowing I wouldn't get pregnant.

They're coming for birth control next -- Louisiana law is already trying to dictate which forms of BC can be used. It's all tied together with abortion in a sweeping effort to control that which they have no right to control.

 

[swingtime]

Just curious for those who are at “rage” level Is there anything that causes you pause? (I am middle of road here) I support a women’s right to choose, I believe rape and incest are real reasons to terminate. I believe in medical choices for the mother’s safety (sadly having experienced a difficult decision myself for my medical safety).

Where I struggle is the woman standing on the corner with a sign that says ”I had 21 abortions”. I struggle with women who choose to use abortion as birth control. This is just so painful and personal for me. What I would not have given to have had a different outcome. And oh how I struggle now with the memories of my doctors’ opinions the agony of giving up and the complete sadness after. To this day sitting alone thinking about it will bring me to tears.

I have a friend who had an abortion in her early 20’s. Then when she got married was never able to conceive. She is 60 now and to this day it pains her.

There doesn’t seem to be any middle ground anywhere anymore and certainly not on this topic.

Try not to lop my head off. Just posing an opinion or a feeling that doesn’t really have an answer but I’m sure will anger some.

P.S. I’m adopted. Somehow I think this also casts a shadow on how I feel.

I am so sorry for your loss. I've never had an abortion. I was extremely careful with birth control. I'm wired that way. I have four friends who've shared with me that they chose to terminate pregnancies. They hadn't used birth control. It surprised me, because I was so cautious. But I didn't judge them. I didn't think that was my place. Two of those friends are childfree by choice. Two later married and had children that they were ready to parent and love. They all have spoken about their abortions with gratitude and no regret.

I've heard people talk about others using abortion as birth control. I have no doubt that people will quote statistics that are not reliable, but I think this must be very rare. Having an abortion is not inexpensive, and it's not pleasant. If there really are women using abortion as birth control, I think abortion is not the problem. Rather, we need better education and access to birth control. And those who scream the loudest about ending reproductive privacy would also oppose comprehensive sex ed and easy access to birth control.

ETA: Just read Matata's post, and I agree that someone holding a sign that says they've had 21 abortions is probably mentally unstable, in which case abortion isn't the problem. Rather we need better access to mental health care.

 

[luvmysparklies]

The red states have found all kinds of ways to suppress voting and gerrymandering local elections. They literally do not care what the Dems think. I live in a purple state -- our Republican Senators stopped taking phone calls in about 2016. Back in the 2000's I would lobby for disability rights, and I could actually make an appointment with a Republican Senator in Washington and meet with them in person. That kind of thing doesn't happen anymore. We are not people to them. We are the enemy.

This right here. It is so apparent given that generally, when there is bi-partisan support for a bill, etc., it means the constituency has a price to pay. I have gotten to the place where, whenever a member of congress is touting something that they have collectively accomplished, I wait for the other shoe to drop.

I read somewhere (can’t remember where) that said all women should participate in a one week strike where women don’t spend any money shopping and don’t go to work.

I can’t see one day crippling the nation. A week would probably get quite a lot of attention.

This would definitely cripple. It is similar to when Al Sharpton promoted a "black out" day years ago (way before George Floyd) to bring more accountability on all the shootings.

 

[mommylawyer]

I am sorry for your loss and for your friend's as well @Mayk.

I am one of the ones at rage level. RAGE.

I do understand your point about abortion as bc but I still don't see that as my business or the US government's business. Using abortion as bc is very sad to me; however, people should be free to make their own healthcare decisions without judgement. So long as the pregnancy is under the time of viability (20 weeks), it should be the woman's decision. Period. Legislating morality does not work.

I agree that it's not a question of morality. That's exactly what I mean about finding a middle ground. Abortion is a medical procedure and all medical procedures have risks. They should not be undertaken without due consideration.

Let's use a kidney stone as an example. It's a tiny thing that needs to be removed from the body. I needed to have one removed recently. I had to have two doctor's consultations and 10 days of pre-op preparation because certain medications need to be completely eliminated from the body before anesthesia.

Additionally, doctor's recommend that certain people keep their kidney stones and proceed on a wait and see basis, rather than undergoing a medical procedure because those people are not good candidates for the procedure due to their particular circumstances.

Basically, I can't walk into a hospital and demand to have a kidney stone removed that same day. I have to jump through some hoops to have it removed, not because it's morally wrong to remove kidney stones, but because it's a medical procedure.

Abortions should be available to all women, but I don't see why they should be treated differently from other medical procedures. The middle ground could be at least one consultation before the procedure and reasonable restrictions, such as a 15-week cutoff period unless there's a medical necessity then the timeframe is expanded. That's still better than the situation with kidney stones.

 

[Lookinagain]

Just curious for those who are at “rage” level Is there anything that causes you pause? (I am middle of road here) I support a women’s right to choose, I believe rape and incest are real reasons to terminate. I believe in medical choices for the mother’s safety (sadly having experienced a difficult decision myself for my medical safety).

Where I struggle is the woman standing on the corner with a sign that says ”I had 21 abortions”. I struggle with women who choose to use abortion as birth control. This is just so painful and personal for me. What I would not have given to have had a different outcome. And oh how I struggle now with the memories of my doctors’ opinions the agony of giving up and the complete sadness after. To this day sitting alone thinking about it will bring me to tears.

I have a friend who had an abortion in her early 20’s. Then when she got married was never able to conceive. She is 60 now and to this day it pains her.

There doesn’t seem to be any middle ground anywhere anymore and certainly not on this topic.

Try not to lop my head off. Just posing an opinion or a feeling that doesn’t really have an answer but I’m sure will anger some.

P.S. I’m adopted. Somehow I think this also casts a shadow on how I feel.

Rights can always be abused by some. But what you mention above are extreme cases and not typical at all. Taking away the rights of all, because the few abuse those rights, punishes everyone. Not just the abusers. And many of the states with trigger laws, or additional proposals to ban all abortion, don't even have exceptions for rape, incest, etc. I looked at the full text of the new proposed Louisiana legislation that says life begins at fertilization to see if there is a carve out for the mother's health. I don't see one.

https://www.legis.la.gov/legis/ViewDocument.aspx?d=1276214

so as someone who had a ruptured ectopic pregnancy, would I be guilty of murder because I had surgery to save my life? Certainly the embryo was fertilized, and even implanted. It nearly killed me. If this law passes in Louisiana, I guess someone in the same situation would have to choose between the life saving surgery or a murder conviction.

This proposed bill also states that 1) The US constitution and the laws of the US are the supreme law of the land and 2) treat as void federal statutes, regulations, orders etc. that deprive the fertilized egg the right to life or equal protection. How do you reconcile these two sections? If LA doesn't have to follow federal statutes, regulations etc. does that mean they are seceding from the Union again?

 

[bludiva]

This right here. It is so apparent given that generally, when there is bi-partisan support for a bill, etc., it means the constituency has a price to pay. I have gotten to the place where, whenever a member of congress is touting something that they have collectively accomplished, I wait for the other shoe to drop.

This would definitely cripple. It is similar to when Al Sharpton promoted a "black out" day years ago (way before George Floyd) to bring more accountability on all the shootings.

I've always thought women needed to strike for equal pay. Stakes are even higher now.

It worked in Iceland.

 

[Mayk]

I'm not sure a comfortable middle ground on such an emotional issue is possible. I look at it from 2 perspectives -- 1) no one should dictate what another does medically to his/her body and 2) abortion is a medical procedure; it is not, to me, the taking of a potential life.

Those women you speak of above are outliers. I would think the sign holder mentally unstable and the latter very rare. I can't imagine many woman putting themselves thorough multiple abortions when other methods are available. Imagine the physical and monetary cost. I knew one person who had 5 abortions. She had no answer to my question about why she didn't use birth control. She was troubled in other ways and would have been a lousy mother so I was relieved she never had a child.

Birth control can fail, people may choose not to raise a child they know will be born with a physical malady that will be financially untenable for the family and/or painful for the child. I think decisions to abort or not in these and all cases should be solely the decision of the woman and those she chooses to include in the decision making.

My rage is directed at the audacity of those who try to take personal power from women. I had a brief taste of that when I wanted a tubal ligation when I was in my mid-twenties. Five doctors would not do it without permission from my husband. I finally found one who would do it and I could breathe easier the rest of my life knowing I wouldn't get pregnant.

They're coming for birth control next -- Louisiana law is already trying to dictate which forms of BC can be used. It's all tied together with abortion in a sweeping effort to control that which they have no right to control.

I said my opinion would cause others to want to lop off my head.

This place has become an echo chamber sadly. Read the posts. One sided. Everyone who differs has moved on.

It’s why I rarely post.

I believe a women should have a choice during the first trimester.

I also thought I should have had an opportunity to make a decision on my vaccine. But my job of 37 years was threatened before I could make an informed decision. I chose Phizer. Still not sure that was the best choice. But hey. It’s my body I got to pick my poison. I’m still employed.

Peace out.

 

[Gussie]

I said my opinion would cause others to want to lop off my head.

This place has become an echo chamber sadly. Read the posts. One sided. Everyone who differs has moved on.

It’s why I rarely post.

I believe a women should have a choice during the first trimester.

I also thought I should have had an opportunity to make a decision on my vaccine. But my job of 37 years was threatened before I could make an informed decision. I chose Phizer. Still not sure that was the best choice. But hey. It’s my body I got to pick my poison. I’m still employed.

Peace out.

Not agreeing with you does not equate to lopping off your head. PS probably does seem like an echo chamber on this issue as most of the posters fit the demographics of those that are pro-choice. I think this thread has been very respectful and low-key considering the topic.

FWIW, I respect your opinion and your decisions. Allow others the same. My body, my choice for all healthcare.

 

[Lookinagain]

Not agreeing with you does not equate to lopping off your head. PS probably does seem like an echo chamber on this issue as most of the posters fit the demographics of those that are pro-choice. I think this thread has been very respectful and low-key considering the topic.

FWIW, I respect your opinion and your decisions. Allow others the same. My body, my choice for all healthcare.

I was just going to say the same. I don't think anyone's head was lopped off. I had the same thought about why most posts in this thread come from the same direction on the issue and figured it was not just that PS'ers come from the same demographic, but that 70% of women and men in the U.S. support a woman's right to choose. So it only makes sense that we'd see that % or even higher given PS demographics.