Roe v. Wade.

[nala]

I do not equate abortion with being a woman’s issue. Why must a man pay child support if he doesn’t want the child? What about if he wants an abortion for her? Why does his careless act of sex make him surrender all his choices to the woman? If she keeps it, he pays and has no say. If she chooses to end it and he wants it, he has no say. Why does only the woman get to be protected from her careless act? Banning abortion will affect all genders. And in this gender fluid world that we live in, it’s about time that abortion isn’t reduced to a woman’s issue.

 

[nala]

When arguing for pro choice, why must people always bring in extremes like rape, incest, life saving circumstances? If In fact abortion is just a medical procedure, why do some supporters only condone it in the most extreme of circumstances? Is it because in non extreme circumstances this medical procedure is viewed as the result of irresponsibility? With so many choices to prevent pregnancy, that is surely the argument that well meaning supporters are making. And yet. These arguments only help the other side by making the argument that abortion should be protected in cases where women had no choice about getting pregnant.

 

[doberman]

And Clarence Thomas has the audacity - the audacity! - to complain that the SC is not getting the respect it deserves.

 

[Matata]

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

I hope no one wants to lop off your head. I'm not mad at you. I understand your opinion. I respect it. I understand the opinion of those who are totally against abortion and I and respect it. I wrestle with my own opinions about abortion. There was a time when the compromises you listed would have been acceptable to me. It is also an acceptable compromise to me to have abortions legal up to viability for any reason.

The reason I ultimately, but not comfortably, settled on abortion up to viability for any reason is the belief of those who want to prohibit abortion because they say all life is equal and every baby has the right to life. That got me thinking about abortion permitted for rape, incest, health of the mother. I asked myself why, if all life is equal, does the life of the mother trump that of the fetus under certain circumstances and not all circumstances. There is a disconnect there that I don't understand.

As a society we permit sending people to war to possibly die to save the lives of all in this nation. As a society we permit the death penalty for criminals. As a society we already decide that some lives are more valuable than others so I don't understand why we argue about the lives of fetuses being more important in some circumstances than in others.

There is another aspect to the compromise situation. The compromises do not balance the equation. To balance the equation, we simply must ensure that all socioeconomic levels of our society have access to medical care, including birth control. Forcing a woman who can't get medical care and birth control to birth a child she does not want when our society is so crappy at providing services makes no sense to me. Forty-nine percent of abortion patients live below the federal poverty level. It's easy to google where medical services are lacking and it's mostly in areas where poverty is extant.

I would be perfectly ok with abortions permitted only in cases of rape/incest/health of mother if we ever are able to ensure that we stop making it so difficult for women who don't want to get pregnant.

We currently have approx 400,000 children in foster care in this country, approx 177,000 of which are waiting for adoption. I have concerns about adding to those numbers.

 

[yssie]

I am one who doesn’t equate abortion with morality in any capacity. I’m also very much at #Rage.

Abortion is hard on the body, expensive, and riskier than almost every other form of birth control out there - no woman in her right mind should be using this as her go-to solution. Given those facts, I wholly agree that women who have had tens of abortions because they eschewed (or were unreasonably careless with) preventative birth control need new doctors - including psychologists. But that’s still not a morality judgment.

A zygote is not a person. An embryo is not a person. A foetus is not a person until it’s capable of surviving outside its host’s body. In purely biological terms pregnancy is a parasitic relationship. An often-desired, often-celebrated parasitic relationship, but it’s parasitic nonetheless: The health of the host is compromised with no benefit. So my view the only “person” in pregnancy is the host (mother), right up until the point of foetal viability. Put that around 22-24 weeks.

(My husband and I are currently trying for a baby. I’m not anti-pregnancy. I’m just anti-adjudicating-other-women’s-pregnancies. And I will not apologize for that.)

 

[whitewave]

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.

Supposedly Marsha Blackburn said today contraception is for married couples only.

this whole thing isn’t just about abortion.

Make no mistake, the evangelicals are coming for everything they don’t like about various lifestyles.

this is what is at stake:

abortion
birth control
fertility treatments
stem cell research
interracial marriage
gay marriage

women‘s rights
women’s health


etc


I don’t like abortion for birth control but I also can’t get hung up on that either.

 

[smitcompton]

Hi.

For me, the question has to do with equality. Red states will outlaw abortion probably altogether. Blue states will continue to offer this medical procedure. We are separate and unequal. This presents a problem in attacking the issue. We must target these red states in particular. It does us no good to strike and hurt the economies of blue states as well as red states. One way is to remove the Federal Aid these states receive from those prosperous blue states. We economically support red states. I have not worked out how. Think, you al,

I remember Brown vs Board of Education. That was also an equality issue. Unequal schools in mainly southern states. I crossed picket lines when I brought my son to school, a white child, in first grade. Only a hand-full of children showed up.

I am interested in the larger framework of this problem+,. Any women , rich or poor deserves to be treated equally. The Gov't does not own my body!

One thought-- Stop supporting churches who work relentlessly against abortion. Tax them for interfering in Gov't. It used to be so.

Annette

 

[fel]

Those of you who only support abortion in the circumstance of rape/incest or the fetus is threatening the life of the mother are probably unfamiliar with the realities of many girls and woman's lives in the United States.

-- Girls can be forced into to marriage/sexual slavery by their parents or other relatives while still a child Alaska: 14 , Mississippi, no minimum age, Michigan: no minimum age, West Virginia, no minimum age, Oklahoma, no minimum age, etc.

In some cultures if a child is raped by a grown man, instead of procecuting the rape the families will force the girl to marry her rapist. At that point sex with her will be deemed consentual. If the girl protests she may be severely abused or even threatened with death.

In other cases reporting a rape is culturally so shameful that a girl may be at risk of being ostrasized, disowned, or of physical violence for reporting a rape,.

In some cases girls or woman are forced into sex in order to access food or housing. Many runaway girls are fleeing abuse including sexual abuse. They are often forced to then engage in sex in order to have shelter.

In other cases girls or woman are forced into having sex or their other children or family members will be harmed or killed (I actually served as foreman on a Jury for one such case so yes it happens.)

In some cases a young woman will go on a date and agree to some level of intimacy but not of having intercourse. The man may at that point force himself on her. However, she may not later be believed, or may feel too guilty to report.

In some cases a woman may be intoxicated, either by choice or because someone spiked her drink, and may be have sex without being capable of consent. Sometimes she might not be aware she had intercourse.

So for all those cases -- you would often have no paper trail or proof that there was a rape. I supposed those woman and girls as young as 11 should be forced to give birth, or die trying to carry to term?

Final question: Who decides what constitutes rape or incest? If it is a jury trial then you are talking about the burden of proof (beyond a reasonable doubt) being on the state, and the burden being against the girl or woman seeking an abortion.

Edited to add prosecution for rape takes longer than 9 months, even if immediately reported.

 

[whitewave]

Those of you who only support abortion in the circumstance of rape/incest or the fetus is threatening the life of the mother are probably unfamiliar with the realities of many girls and woman's lives in the United States.

-- Girls can be forced into to marriage/sexual slavery by their parents or other relatives while still a child Alaska: 14 , Mississippi, no minimum age, Michigan: no minimum age, West Virginia, no minimum age, Oklahoma, no minimum age, etc.

In some cultures if a child is raped by a grown man, instead of procecuting the rape the families will force the girl to marry her rapist. At that point sex with her will be deemed consentual. If the girl protests she may be severely abused or even threatened with death.

In other cases reporting a rape is culturally so shameful that a girl may be at risk of being ostrasized, disowned, or of physical violence for reporting a rape,.

In some cases girls or woman are forced into sex in order to access food or housing. Many runaway girls are fleeing abuse including sexual abuse. They are often forced to then engage in sex in order to have shelter.

In other cases girls are woman are forced into having sex or their other children or family members will be harmed or killed (I actually served as foreman on a Jury for one such case so yes it happens.)

In some cases a young woman will go on a date and agree to some level of intimacy but not of having intercourse. The man may at that point force himself on her. However, she may not later be believed, or may feel too guilty to report.

In some cases a woman may be intoxicated, either by choice or because someone spiked her drink, and may be have sex without being capable of consent. Sometimes she might not be aware she had intercourse.

So for all those cases -- you would often have no paper trail or proof that there was a rape. I supposed those woman and girls as young as 11 should be forced to give birth, or die trying to carry to term?

Final question: Who decides what constitutes rape or incest? If it is a jury trial then you are talking about the burden of proof being on the state, and the burden being agains the girl or woman seeking an abortion.

I have said this to my mother— we truly have no idea what some girls and women are going through. I’m not another woman’s doctor, partner or her god so it’s none of my business. I won’t tell another woman what she can do with her body

 

[missy]

It’s none of our business what anybody does with their own body. Period. It really is that simple.

 

[swingtime]

I do not equate abortion with being a woman’s issue. Why must a man pay child support if he doesn’t want the child? What about if he wants an abortion for her? Why does his careless act of sex make him surrender all his choices to the woman? If she keeps it, he pays and has no say. If she chooses to end it and he wants it, he has no say. Why does only the woman get to be protected from her careless act? Banning abortion will affect all genders. And in this gender fluid world that we live in, it’s about time that abortion isn’t reduced to a woman’s issue.

The men in my life all view women's rights as human rights. And they are vocal about supporting abortion rights. Part of the reason that I view abortion as a women's issue is that some of the most vociferous opponents of abortion rights believe, I think, that women should not enjoy sex. Women's sexuality is viewed by some as a threat. The ability to control reproduction frees and empowers women, and that is viewed as a threat. So birth control is next on the chopping block.

 

[Demon]

Now this: An Idaho chairman of the house state affairs committee says he wants to
consider legislations banning Plan B. He's not yet certain about bills banning IUDs.

I'd post the link, but since it names the person, I don't want to get the thread shut down.

 

[josieKat]

I also don’t view it in terms of morality aside from the moral right to have control of one’s body. No one can be forced to donate any part of their body, not even their kidney or their blood, even if someone else, even if a baby, would die without it, and even if you are dead. Being forced to carry a baby is the same as being forced to donate your body to someone else, and I don’t think that should ever happen. I certainly understand if someone personally prioritizes the life of an embryo/zygote/fetus above their own - they have the right to feel that way and act accordingly. But it completely violates one’s bodily autonomy to be forced to do so.

 

[Calliecake]

Now this: An Idaho chairman of the house state affairs committee says he wants to
consider legislations banning Plan B. He's not yet certain about bills banning IUDs.

I'd post the link, but since it names the person, I don't want to get the thread shut down.

And so it begins…….

Next up will be IUD’s and birth control pills.

 

[whitewave]

Some interesting things I have found on Twitter:

 

[Demon]

And so it begins…….

Next up will be IUD’s and birth control pills.

No doubt. My daughter has an IUD right now. She's decided she doesn't want kids and I told her she might start thinking about getting her tubes tied.

 

[whitewave]

I assume this is true because I believe it is Oklahoma who is trying to prevent pregnant women from leaving the state to get an abortion.

I think it’s Missouri who is trying to pass a bill that gives a fertilized egg residency so they can prevent a pregnant woman from leaving the state. (I’d laugh at the stupidity if it wasn’t so dystopian).

 

[Demon]

I assume this is true because I believe it is Oklahoma who is trying to prevent pregnant women from leaving the state to get an abortion.

I think it’s Missouri who is trying to pass a bill that gives a fertilized egg residency so they can prevent a pregnant woman from leaving the state. (I’d laugh at the stupidity if it wasn’t so dystopian).

I don't doubt he'd try, but is that even possible? Without requiring states to have residency rules? How would that be legal?

 

[whitewave]

All I know is: I’m going to start throwing money to democrat candidates in red states in order to help them become viable candidates.

 

[whitewave]

I don't doubt he'd try, but is that even possible? Without requiring states to have residency rules? How would that be legal?

They love to pass obnoxious things that they know are unconstitutional so that it can go before the Supreme Court. They have been doing this for the point of chipping away at roe v wade so it would eventually be overturned.

 

[Demon]

They love to pass obnoxious things that they know are unconstitutional so that it can go before the Supreme Court.

Where this court would likely rule that it is constitutional, somehow.

 

[Calliecake]

All I know is: I’m going to start throwing money to democrat candidates in red states in order to help them become viable candidates.

You aren’t alone @whitewave!

 

[Calliecake]

I assume this is true because I believe it is Oklahoma who is trying to prevent pregnant women from leaving the state to get an abortion.

I think it’s Missouri who is trying to pass a bill that gives a fertilized egg residency so they can prevent a pregnant woman from leaving the state. (I’d laugh at the stupidity if it wasn’t so dystopian).

I’m expecting more of the same from the 26 states that want to overturn abortion.

 

[Matata]

I think it’s Missouri who is trying to pass a bill that gives a fertilized egg residency so they can prevent a pregnant woman from leaving the state. (I’d laugh at the stupidity if it wasn’t so dystopian).

So much grandstanding and still more to come. To implement such a (stupid) law would require daily pregnancy testing of every woman in the state. Women will quit going to the doctor to confirm pregnancy, probably quit buying at-home testing kits for fear they'd be reported, and travel to an abortion-legal state each time they miss a period. Those who don't have the resources to travel are at the mercy of the state's overlords.

 

[ItsMainelyYou]

An Aside:
You know, just wool gathering, but the another time Christian fundamentalists were allowed to apply religious morality American policy was prohibition. That was disastrous and was one of the main catalysts for organized crime gaining a foothold and the flourishing of political corruption in the country.
It was one of our biggest historical failures.
Crime always explodes under draconian rule.

 

[mommylawyer]

Speaking of crime, I hope the red states are ready for the massive crime spike coming their way in the not-too-distant future: Legalized abortion is estimated to have reduced violent crime by 47% and property crime by 33% over this period, and thus can explain most of the observed crime decline.

The Impact of Legalized Abortion on Crime over the Last Two Decades | Stanford Law School

Donohue and Levitt (2001) presented evidence that the legalization of abortion in the early 1970s played an important role in the crime drop of the 19

law.stanford.edu

 

[Rhea]

I agree with the ability to choose medial procedures for oneself wholeheartedly.

A concern of mine, aside from outlawing abortion is that many many drugs are not prescribed or used solely for their intended proposes.

I've had an IUD and originally it was for birth control. In my mid 20s I had an inability to hold my bladder or control bowel function. I literally shit and pee'd my pants, in public several times. I have fibroids, as do mum and sis, I just do it better! They press on my internal organs causing loss of control as they grow. IUD is one of the the best ways to control them though they've been bad enough I've also needed surgery. Like many women I got horrendously painful, can't get out of bed, throw up everything for days, not sure anyone would actually keep me employed, periods. Thankfully I can't really recall that properly, with an IUD I don't get a period at all.

I'm not in the US and highly doubt I will ever return there to live. But it scares me that these medical decisions, big ones, which control every aspect of physical and mental health of women are under attack. There are many complicated and simple reasons people make any medical decision. To have that under attack is mind-numbingly short-sighted.

 

[Gussie]

They love to pass obnoxious things that they know are unconstitutional so that it can go before the Supreme Court. They have been doing this for the point of chipping away at roe v wade so it would eventually be overturned.

You can't get much more obnoxious than the bounty system here in Texas that pits neighbor against neighbor. And the SC let it stay. I am so afraid for our country.

 

[ItsMainelyYou]

You can't get much more obnoxious than the bounty system here in Texas that pits neighbor against neighbor. And the SC let it stay. I am so afraid for our country.

The last time we had a bounty system in place was during slavery. It's the precursor of our modern police force.

 

[whitewave]

And so it begins…….

Next up will be IUD’s and birth control pills.

Don’t forget uterine ablation and hysterectomy in child bearing age women. We earthen vessels need to provide that domestic supply of (white) infants for people Mrs. Barrett knows who want to adopt.