Abortion in America

[Leopold Stotch]

Exclusive: Supreme Court has voted to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled,” Justice Alito writes in an initial majority draft circulated inside the court.

www.politico.com

While it is not official and opinions CAN change. . . I doubt this one will change. And I'm so angry and saddened by this. I just wish the U.S. government and religious right would stay the **** out of our bedrooms, stay the **** out of mine and others' body parts, JUST STAY THE **** OUT.

 

[Noodle]

The same douchebags who refused the COVID vaccine, "You can't tell me what to do with my body" are now screaming, "I get to tell you what to do with YOUR body!" Fucking disgusting.

 

[Glurin]

Before all you guys work yourselves up into a frenzy, you should know that all this does, once it's official, is kick the issue back into the legislature, which is exactly where it always should have been. It doesn't ban anything or kill people or cause racism or anything else that the extreme left is screaming that it does.

By the way, in actuality we've gone so far beyond Roe v Wade at this point that limitations and bans on second and third trimester abortions are in fact a step back toward it. The abortion advocates like to pretend that it somehow magically ingrained in the constitution the right to kill babies at any time, with some degenerates even literally advocating for "abortions" years after the birth. However, the Roe v Wade decision specifically said it's fine in the first trimester, but states were well within their authority to impose regulations and limits in the second and third. Even McCorvey, the "Roe" in Roe v Wade, spoke out against abortions outside of the first trimester.

Which believe it or not lines up pretty well with historical precedent. Back before the 1900s, abortion was legal in the U.S. until the "quickening", which is the moment the woman feels the fetus moving and thus knows she's pregnant. Keep in mind, this is during a time when peeing on a stick to find out if you're pregnant quite literally meant go and pee on a stick.

All that being said, something these states that are imposing restrictions on abortion really need to do is make some repairs and improvements to the alternatives. The adoption system, for example.

 

[superdave]

All that being said, something these states that are imposing restrictions on abortion really need to do is make some repairs and improvements to the alternatives. The adoption system, for exaexample.

Be forced to push a 10 pounder out of your asshole and then we might listen to your thoughts on the subject.

 

[superdave]

Welcome to the United States of Gilead.

 

[Leopold Stotch]

Before all you guys work yourselves up into a frenzy, you should know that all this does, once it's official, is kick the issue back into the legislature, which is exactly where it always should have been. It doesn't ban anything or kill people or cause racism or anything else that the extreme left is screaming that it does.

Are you ****ing kidding me???? The entire American system is SYSTEMICALLY and INSTITUTIONALLY racist. Healthcare for white people vs minorities is already at a great disparity before you even add if someone is poor or not. Black women are three times more likely to die from a pregnancy related cause than a white woman. When the head of World Health Organization says restrictions on abortions drives women and girls to unsafe abortions that's telling and informative so don't you dare tell me that this won't kill people or cause racism because it has and will do so further.

If the legislature actually thought rationally, looked at medical and scientific facts, and put women first, I don't think I'd have a problem if states regulated abortion fairly (see New York and California). BUT NOOOOOOO that's why I feel it should be a federal law like it has been for 49 years.

By the way, in actuality we've gone so far beyond Roe v Wade at this point that limitations and bans on second and third trimester abortions are in fact a step back toward it. The abortion advocates like to pretend that it somehow magically ingrained in the constitution the right to kill babies at any time, with some degenerates even literally advocating for "abortions" years after the birth.

WTF are you even talking about here?? If someone is wanting/needing an abortion into the third trimester, it usually means the mother's life is at risk and the fetus is no longer viable. Pregnant women who are that far along WANT their babies. IDK where this ****ing idea came from that women who want/need abortions that far along are cold baby killers but it's so ****ing false it's never been funny.

However, the Roe v Wade decision specifically said it's fine in the first trimester, but states were well within their authority to impose regulations and limits in the second and third. Even McCorvey, the "Roe" in Roe v Wade, spoke out against abortions outside of the first trimester.

And she made a deathbed confession saying that she was paid by anti-abortion groups. Even if she really did go full circle and went pro-life, that's still her choice for herself. ALL I WANT FOR FUCKING WOMEN IS TO HAVE THE CHOICE TO DO WHAT THEY WANT FOR THEIR BODIES, THEIR LIVES, THEIR FAMILIES. If *I* were to get pregnant, I'd probably want to keep it BUT THAT IS MY CHOICE FOR MYSELF. How dare I impose my views on someone else especially WHEN IT'S NONE OF MY GODDAMN BUSINESS.

Which believe it or not lines up pretty well with historical precedent. Back before the 1900s, abortion was legal in the U.S. until the "quickening", which is the moment the woman feels the fetus moving and thus knows she's pregnant. Keep in mind, this is during a time when peeing on a stick to find out if you're pregnant quite literally meant go and pee on a stick.

What?

Also, since you conservative people LOOOOVE to remind us libs/Dems that we used to be "pro-slavery" back in the day, did you know that Republicans used to be pro-choice? It was only in the 70s and 80s that the party became pro-life because they wanted the Evangelical/religious vote and financial support. Y'all's beloved Ronald Reagan signed a pretty liberal abortion bill into California law only to reverse it in 1976 because he knew he could get the religious vote and the money to back up his campaign.

This is an issue that has become weaponized to keep conservatives and religious voters angry and keep them at the polls when really it's no one's ****ing business aside from the woman's and her doctors.

All that being said, something these states that are imposing restrictions on abortion really need to do is make some repairs and improvements to the alternatives. The adoption system, for example.

You know, we could absolutely do some repairs and improvements! Like, actual sex education. Not just "abstenince because it's wrong to have sex outside of marriage" but actual "Here's a condom and this is what it does. Here's a diaphragm and this is what it does. These are the diseases that can happen when you have sex and this is what you can do when/if you get them. Condoms help prevent STDs. This is what consent looks like." We could give more funding to Planned Parenthood because they do WAY MORE than just abortions and also help men.

We could put further restrictions and access on guns, BETTER EDUCATION on guns to prevent school shootings and in high crime neighborhoods but who actually wants to tackle that issue?

We could stop with the sitgmatization of people on welfare and food stamps. ****, we could raise the federal minimum wage so people can actually live and afford shit but that would be too fucking easy, wouldn't it?

@Glurin, I have no idea if you're gonna read any of the links I provided or if you're even gonna read this post but I'm gonna tell you right here and now: Unless you say it's our choice, I'm not gonna listen to anything you or anyone else with your viewpoint has to say. I'm not doing it. Am I being intolerant? **** yeah I am because this is an attack on women's livelihoods and bodies and I'm not going to tolerate any man, woman, inbetweener telling me what to do with my medical, sexual, maternal, and familial life. I am staunchly pro-choice and no one is going to change my mind about that.

 

[Dredd]

Be forced to push a 10 pounder out of your asshole and then we might listen to your thoughts on the subject.

I still won't listen unless he has to carry that thing the full nine months first.

 

[Glurin]

Are you ****ing kidding me???? The entire American system is SYSTEMICALLY and INSTITUTIONALLY racist.

A claim thoroughly debunked multiple times over, but if you're specifically talking about the abortion industry, then sure, you may have a point there. Planned Parenthood was founded by a racist for the explicit purpose of preventing more black children from being born, who account for almost 40% of the near million abortions that take place per year.

WTF are you even talking about here?? If someone is wanting/needing an abortion into the third trimester, it usually means the mother's life is at risk and the fetus is no longer viable. Pregnant women who are that far along WANT their babies. IDK where this ****ing idea came from that women who want/need abortions that far along are cold baby killers but it's so ****ing false it's never been funny.

It came from the mouths of the militant abortion advocates themselves as well as the Democrat party, whom have repeatedly voted against bills that banned late term abortions with exceptions in them for the physical health of the mother because they wanted to include mental, social and economic health as well. If you believe that what they are saying and doing is not a reflection of reality, then you shouldn't have any problems with laws banning or restricting abortions in the second and third trimester, just like the vast majority of the country. Only 34% support abortions in the second trimester, and even fewer the third.

So all this talk of "the religious right wants to control women's bodies" is complete hogwash.

What?

What do you mean "what"? That's what the law was back then. You could get an abortion before the quickening, which typically takes place somewhere in the fourth month, or second trimester according to today's standards. After that point, it was illegal. The same rule was applied to murder cases. If a woman was killed while pregnant, it was a double murder if it happened after the quickening, but not if it didn't.

It wasn't until well into the late 19th century that abortion was banned, along with contraceptives which is rather silly. The Roe v Wade decision basically just brought it back to what we had in the 1700s and early 1800s. Government couldn't ban all abortion outright, but could put viability dependent restrictions and bans on it to protect the life of the unborn child. That viability was divided into the trimesters, which is where the idea comes from.

What this means is that all the "pro-choice" people out their screaming their lungs out saying abortion should be 100% legal no matter what are not only going against the will of the people, but also spitting on the Roe v Wade decision they so vehemently claim to support.

We could give more funding to Planned Parenthood because they do WAY MORE than just abortions and also help men.

Yup, they sure do. If you don't want an abortion, they give you a pamphlet and shove you out the door. No, I'm not kidding. That's the full extent of their "other health services".

 

[Leopold Stotch]

Yup, they sure do. If you don't want an abortion, they give you a pamphlet and shove you out the door. No, I'm not kidding. That's the full extent of their "other health services".

I will reply to the rest of this post in a hot minute, but you are totally and absolutely wrong here because I'VE been to Planned Parenthood many times and they have always helped me with my gynecology checkups, access to condoms and birth control, even screened me for my depression. Every time I was there, I never got any pamphlets for abortions, didn't even see it in the rooms. You know what I saw? Posters about the reproductive systems. What different STDs look like. Information about health and such. It looked like a normal doctor's office. The last year I went they started to broaden their scope and see people for colds, illness, minor things like that and their families. I went to Planned Parenthood because I was on low-income health insurance through the state and PP was the only thing I could afford at that time so don't you dare utter such nonsense because it is a blatant-ass LIE, especially when I and thousands of other people have experienced such and we can tell you otherwise.

Have YOU ever been to PP, @Glurin? Or are you just assuming the worst of it?

 

[Glurin]

Abortion is their business. That is a cold hard fact. Sure, they'll test you for STD's and such, but don't kid yourself. They are built around abortions and profiting from it. That is where the bulk of their income is. They have even been exposed at one point of imposing abortion quotas on their clinics. They are also quite infamous for merely offering referrals for things like breast cancer screenings, but nonetheless taking credit for the screenings themselves. Not to mention the fact that the number of other services they've provided has actually declined over the years, and that's with their deceptive practice of counting every single individual task as "other services".

And as far as loosing access to health care if PP goes away, that is a "blatant-ass LIE". There are literally tens of thousands of other clinics and agencies that offer those same services and more other than abortion and coincidentally are also not incentivized to encourage women to get an abortion either.

 

[Glurin]

Oh by the way, even Ginsburg wanted the supreme court to take another run at Roe v Wade because she knew that predicating it on the right to privacy would not hold up in the long run under serious scrutiny. She knew it was a bad decision. Not because she was against abortion though. On the contrary, she was against Roe v Wade because she was in favor of abortion. She wanted to take it on under equal protection. She is on the record as having stated that abortion would not even be the controversy it is today had Roe v Wade merely struck down the state law in question at the time and went no further, and she was right about that.

Her position was that it should have been left up to the states and the legislature, which is exactly what this upcoming ruling will do.

You should be celebrating this decision! This is your chance to settle the matter. No more relying on the whims of a handful of judges from 1973 creating a bogus constitutional right that doesn't actually exist and has absolutely zero supporting precedent for it's existence. Instead the decision is once again back in the hands of the people, most of which are against abortions being legal after ~20 weeks except in the exceedingly rare cases where the mother could die, but hugely support it before then.

 

[Noodle]

This ignorant, hypocritical fascist is the perfect example of someone who is against a COVID vaccine requirement because no one can tell him what he can and can't do with his body, but it's OK for him to tell other people what they can and can't do with their bodies. Just a worthless, fact-denying troll.

 

[Talga Vasternich]

Exclusive: Supreme Court has voted to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled,” Justice Alito writes in an initial majority draft circulated inside the court.

www.politico.com

While it is not official and opinions CAN change. . . I doubt this one will change. And I'm so angry and saddened by this. I just wish the U.S. government and religious right would stay the **** out of our bedrooms, stay the **** out of mine and others' body parts, JUST STAY THE **** OUT.

I wholeheartedly agree with the federal government staying the f*** out of a whole lot of things.
Abortion is just another one of them.
That means nothing to do with it... i.e. no tax funding to any person/persons, organization, or facility that performs them or woman who has one performed.
Also included would be the elimination of any government grant money for research that uses aborted fetal tissue and zero medicare/medicade reimbursement for medicine derived from aborted fetal tissue.

 

[Leopold Stotch]

Sad fucking day today. Some part of me held on to hope. It wasn't much, but there was some, hoping and believing "No it won't happen." Well... Here we are.

The blood of our women is on your hands if you support and believe this. **** you. I said what I said.

 

[Talga Vasternich]

Sad fucking day today. Some part of me held on to hope. It wasn't much, but there was some, hoping and believing "No it won't happen." Well... Here we are.

The blood of our women is on your hands if you support and believe this. **** you. I said what I said.

You said in the first post you wanted the US Government out of this. The US Government is now out.

Careful what you wish for.

 

[Leopold Stotch]

You said in the first post you wanted the US Government out of this. The US Government is now out.

Careful what you wish for.

Let me take a page out of the over zealous extreme right's playbook and say, "Not like that."

I don't ANYONE telling me what I can and do with my body because it's none of their goddamn business; whether I wanna whore it out or suck one genitalia for the rest of my life, my choice. We ALL (right wing, left wing, dark wing, whatever) deserve the right to privacy and autonomy and that's what's being taken away. The govt doesn't think that I, SOMEONE WHO MAKES HUMANS WITH MY BODY, should have privacy or autonomy. It feels the States do and it's wrong for several reasons:

1.) Half these states don't feel abortion should exist so they're gonna make that choice for us and take it away. How in the **** does that make sense?
2.) This isn't "small government." This is "Well, it shouldn't have happened in the first place because THINK OF THE UNBORN CHILDREN and we're tired of this. Let's let half our states make it illegal." And that's supposed to stop the pro-life quacks? No, they want to make abortion ban nationwide!
3.) "It's not a constitutional right," "It's not in the Constitution." Well neither are AR-15s SPECIFICALLY but they have more rights than I do.
4.) Take away the morality of this and abortion is a MEDICAL procedure. It should REMAIN just that and remain between a woman and her doctor in what to do. And, y'all, don't let Glurin tell y'all they kill babies up until they are born. Most abortions happen before 12 or 13 weeks. Anything after is wanted and something is severely and medically wrong if abortion is on the table.
5.) This affects men too. Y'all may think it don't, but if you're married or with a gf and something fucked up happens to her... WTF you gonna do? Tell her she has to carry that child she don't want?? Oh, what a great guy you are.
6.) Why is it when it came to the COVID-19 vaccine it's my body my choice but with it comes to this everybody be all up in our wombs? Ironic much???
7.) This isn't about "sAvInG tHe cHiLdReN!1" This is straight up control of women's bodies and forced birth.

 

[Glurin]

1.) Half these states don't feel abortion should exist so they're gonna make that choice for us and take it away. How in the **** does that make sense?

Because it's now in the hands of the voters, the vast majority of whom (whole heck of a lot of them being women) do in fact want limits placed on abortion. It is in reality the woke extremists who are not in step with popular opinion. Or the actual terms of Roe v. Wade for that matter.

2.) This isn't "small government." This is "Well, it shouldn't have happened in the first place because THINK OF THE UNBORN CHILDREN and we're tired of this. Let's let half our states make it illegal." And that's supposed to stop the pro-life quacks? No, they want to make abortion ban nationwide!

I'm sure some do. I'm also pretty sure we will see a surge of states competing with each other to prove how "virtuous" they are either by increasing levels of limitations on abortion or by increasing levels of facilitating it. Neither is ideal, but it's a process that we must go through in order to settle the matter, and one that has been allowed to fester for far too long because it was being held up by just a small handful of old geezers sitting in a courtroom.

3.) "It's not a constitutional right," "It's not in the Constitution." Well neither are AR-15s SPECIFICALLY but they have more rights than I do.

False equivalency. Abortion is not anywhere in the constitution. Abortion isn't supported by anything in the constitution. Abortion isn't even supported as a right by historical precedent. Roe was overturned because predicating it on the right to privacy was an unstable argument at best, even discounting the fact that in the Roe v. Wade decision the judges in 1973 almost literally cited "trust me bro" as a source for it being in the constitution. Even Ginsburg knew and acknowledged this, the ultra maga extreme right wing nazi fascist racist sexist bigot homophobe transphobe xenophobe monster that she was.

Roe is and always was a bad decision with improper reasoning to support it.

4.) Take away the morality of this and abortion is a MEDICAL procedure.

So is a lobotomy.

And, y'all, don't let Glurin tell y'all they kill babies up until they are born.

Except, you know, that's exactly what those protesters calling for violence right now are marching for. They don't want "safe, rare and legal". We are way, way, WAY past that. They want people to throw parties celebrating their sixth or seventh abortion. They quite literally want to legally be able to leave that baby gasping for air on the table after it's born as they decide whether or not to have an "abortion".

Yes, most abortions take place within the first trimester. That changes absolutely nothing about what the people you call allies are fighting for. Make no mistake about it, those people are going to make the left lose the abortion debate.

5.) This affects men too. Y'all may think it don't, but if you're married or with a gf and something fucked up happens to her... WTF you gonna do?

Um, yeah, guess what. Most abortion laws have exceptions for things like that and most pro-life people are cool with it, so.....

6.) Why is it when it came to the COVID-19 vaccine it's my body my choice but with it comes to this everybody be all up in our wombs? Ironic much???

Not really. Abortion = forcibly ending another human life. Vax mandates = forcibly injecting experimental drugs into other people. In both cases, you're not actually talking about voluntarily doing something to your own body. You're talking about forcibly doing something to some other person's body.

7.) This isn't about "sAvInG tHe cHiLdReN!1" This is straight up control of women's bodies and forced birth.

Um, no. It's quite literally about saving the children. It's strangely one of the only topics where "think of the children" isn't just an appeal to emotion. Abortion is taking a child's life or potential life. That's what it is. That is it's very definition. It's core essence. You can't get around it no matter how much you try to deny it. The only question that remains is at what stage that life begins. Roe v. Wade introduced the concept of viability as a possible demarcation, but that line changes as technology improves and has largely been ignored by the modern left anyway.

 

[Leopold Stotch]

Because it's now in the hands of the voters, the vast majority of whom (whole heck of a lot of them being women) do in fact want limits placed on abortion. It is in reality the woke extremists who are not in step with popular opinion. Or the actual terms of Roe v. Wade for that matter.

Nope. In total, 61% of Americans think abortion should remain legal (27% in all cases, 34% in most cases). In that same article, it's only 38% of Americans who think abortion should be illegal (12% in all cases, 26% in most cases)

False equivalency. Abortion is not anywhere in the constitution. Abortion isn't supported by anything in the constitution. Abortion isn't even supported as a right by historical precedent.

So, by this logic, do you feel that same-sex marriage, consensual gay sex, and contraception shouldn't be supported? None of them are mentioned in the Constitution either. Thomas wants to re-evaluate those too. Funny that he didn't mention interacial marriage (that's not in the Constitution either!) because rules for me are not for thee. Technically, I shouldn't even have the right to vote because it's not directly protected but amendments have been added. I guess my big question is where does it ****ing end, Glurin?

Even Ginsburg knew and acknowledged this, the ultra maga extreme right wing nazi fascist racist sexist bigot homophobe transphobe xenophobe monster that she was.

Roe is and always was a bad decision with improper reasoning to support it.

Sure. . .

So is a lobotomy.

While it is a medical procedure, the two are not even in the same league. Abortions can save lives, lobotomies **** up lives. Try again.

Except, you know, that's exactly what those protesters calling for violence right now are marching for. They don't want "safe, rare and legal". We are way, way, WAY past that. They want people to throw parties celebrating their sixth or seventh abortion. They quite literally want to legally be able to leave that baby gasping for air on the table after it's born as they decide whether or not to have an "abortion".

Yes, most abortions take place within the first trimester. That changes absolutely nothing about what the people you call allies are fighting for. Make no mistake about it, those people are going to make the left lose the abortion debate.

Keep drinking that Fox News Aide, man. I never said abortion is rare but goddamn yes we do want safe and legal because otherwise WE CAN FUCKING DIE. But who cares about another dead woman, as long as that baby lives, right?

Um, yeah, guess what. Most abortion laws have exceptions for things like that and most pro-life people are cool with it, so.....

This is what PISSES me off the most about your post because you CLEARLY you don't know or don't want to know. The very state i live in currently (Texas) makes ABSOLUTELY NO GODDAMN EXCEPTION. You get raped? Too bad. Your dad rapes you at night? Again, too bad. If you find out your pregnant and it's passed 6 weeks, you HAVE to carry that baby to term. If your life happens to be in "danger of death or a serious risk of substantial impairment of a major bodily function," then maybe-- JUST MAYBE-- you might be able to get an abortion. This poor woman's water broke at 18 weeks and docs told her she could wait until 24 weeks to deliver or terminate. She chose to terminate because it was better than her baby suffering (how did you put it earlier? "Gasping for air on the table" was it?). The goddamn hospital denied her choice because of the vague-ass wording of TX law and she was forced to wait at least 3-4 days before her symptoms worsened and the committee hearing her case before granting her choice.

Oklahoma, Arkansas, Alabama make ABSOLUTELY NO EXCEPTION unless "the mother's life is at risk." Louisiana just approved a bill that bans abortion after "fertilization and implantation." So don't ****ing tell me there's exceptions when there is not in several of these states, with possibly more to come.

And last I checked, most pro-lifers are of the opinion, "Well, if it's a child of sexual assault, then it's meant to be/their life matters too/ it's still a person." Pfffft gtfo with that B.S. As long as that fetus lives, that's all they care about.

Not really. Abortion = forcibly ending another human life. Vax mandates = forcibly injecting experimental drugs into other people. In both cases, you're not actually talking about voluntarily doing something to your own body. You're talking about forcibly doing something to some other person's body.

We are the ones to incubate these beings for 9 months!!!! We speak for both ourselves and the being inside us and if something goes wrong, most of us (and our husbands/partners) are going to say, "Pick me/my wife/partner."

Glurin, not that this is going to matter to you or this debate, but I had to have a C-section when I gave birth. I tried to do it naturally, my body wasn't progressing. I was scared AF. And we loved our baby, we wanted our baby very much, but if it came down to it, we both felt and expressed, "Save me, please." I'm going to put it crassly but I can make another baby. Luckily, everyone turned out fine and healthy.

But heeeyyy, if I have to carry a tiny human being the size of a goddamn watermelon, why not force men to get vascetomies? You can get it undone when and if you want kids.

Um, no. It's quite literally about saving the children. It's strangely one of the only topics where "think of the children" isn't just an appeal to emotion. Abortion is taking a child's life or potential life. That's what it is. That is it's very definition. It's core essence. You can't get around it no matter how much you try to deny it. The only question that remains is at what stage that life begins. Roe v. Wade introduced the concept of viability as a possible demarcation, but that line changes as technology improves and has largely been ignored by the modern left anyway.

How is it that when it comes to abortion, it's "think of the children because it's murder" but when ACTUAL CHILDREN get murdered in schools and people are calling for stricter laws about guns..... ****ing crickets? Or "Not mah guns! I have THE RIGHT! It's in the 2nd Amendment!" First of all, it says "arms," not AR-15s.... Second of all, when it comes to 6-10 year olds, **** 'em, right? As long as they can have their guns....

Also, how about it's nobody's ****ing business what she does with her body? It's between her and her doctor. It is a painful and agonizing decision. The right has you believing that women are completely cold and callous when we make these decisions when it's so much more complex than that. But don't believe me. I'm just a senseless wummin.

 

[Glurin]

Nope. In total, 61% of Americans think abortion should remain legal (27% in all cases, 34% in most cases). In that same article, it's only 38% of Americans who think abortion should be illegal (12% in all cases, 26% in most cases)

You're asking the wrong question. Again. Yes, 61% say it should be legal. That number drops considerably when you add "in the second or third trimester". "34% in most cases" is how that's reflected in the article you posted.

So, by this logic, do you feel that same-sex marriage, consensual gay sex, and contraception shouldn't be supported?

Actually I believe the government should get out of the marriage business entirely. I don't give a rat's ass if you want to marry a man or a woman or a dog or a mop or anything else. And unlike abortion, marriage does not involve deciding whether an innocent third party lives or dies.

While it is a medical procedure, the two are not even in the same league. Abortions can save lives, lobotomies **** up lives. Try again.

Hey, I thought we were ignoring morality for a moment here. Who gives a crap if lobotomies **** up lives. It's a medical procedure and therefore should be available to everyone in all circumstances, right?

Yes, abortion can save lives. In the so exceedingly rare that it may as well be a non-issue and getting rarer set of circumstances where the mother's life may be in danger if she carries the baby all the way to birth. And again, most abortion laws have an exception built in for those circumstances anyway, so you're just barking at nothing again.

Here's another statistic for you. The percentage of abortions performed with the life or health of the mother being in danger given as the reason for doing so accounts for only about slightly over 1% of all abortions. Even the research arm of planned parenthood only got that number up to about 4% by vaguely referring to health problems including non-life threatening ones. The number is even lower for **** and incest. Almost all abortions in the U.S. are done for social or economic reasons.

Keep drinking that Fox News Aide, man. I never said abortion is rare but goddamn yes we do want safe and legal because otherwise WE CAN FUCKING DIE. But who cares about another dead woman, as long as that baby lives, right?

Uh huh. OMG WE ALL GONNA DIE IF WE CAN'T KILL BABIES!!!!

Might want to recheck who it is that's drinking kool-aid.

This is what PISSES me off the most about your post because you CLEARLY you don't know or don't want to know. The very state i live in currently (Texas) makes ABSOLUTELY NO GODDAMN EXCEPTION.

First of all, that's a lie. The Texas law does in fact include a medical emergency exception, though it's pretty narrow and problematic as demonstrated by the example you yourself provided.

Second, Texas is not "most". You have a problem with the Texas law? Then fight the Texas law.

Other states you mentioned, Alabama left no exceptions deliberately just so they could challenge Roe v Wade. Now there's talk of replacing that ban with one that includes exceptions. We'll have to wait and see how that shakes out. Arkansas, again, now that Roe is overturned, some talk of adding exceptions but doesn't sound as serious about it as Alabama. In every case, there is an exception for the life of the mother, including Oklahoma which I will cover now.

The reason I'm addressing Oklahoma separately is because Oklahoma is very confused at the moment. You see, one of the campaign promises the governor made would be that he would sign every abortion ban that came across his desk, and he has kept his word. The problem is that in the past year, no less than 5 different contradictory abortion bans have been signed into law and nobody is sure which laws are actually in effect. Not the governer, nor the legislature, nor the DAs or the clinics and hospitals. The last two laws were just weeks apart from each other. One of those has exceptions for **** and incest, the other does not.

How is it that when it comes to abortion, it's "think of the children because it's murder" but when ACTUAL CHILDREN get murdered in schools and people are calling for stricter laws about guns..... ****ing crickets? Or "Not mah guns! I have THE RIGHT! It's in the 2nd Amendment!" First of all, it says "arms," not AR-15s.... Second of all, when it comes to 6-10 year olds, **** 'em, right? As long as they can have their guns....

All dogs are animals, but not all animals are dogs. That's a basic lesson in logic. The second amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms. AR-15s are arms. It doesn't have to specifically mention AR-15s because they are included by default and you would need to make a very, VERY convincing case as to why AR-15s in particular should be excluded. There's also that nagging fact that had the teachers been armed, perhaps not so many 6-10 year olds would have died. Or maybe if the police officers (good guys with guns) actually did their jobs and used their guns to stop the killer. Yeah, in short, oranges aren't even involved here. You're trying to make an apples to gorillas comparison.

Abortion is not mentioned in the constitution. Abortion is not implied in the constitution. Abortion isn't attached to any other right, except perhaps the right to life which, guess what, kinda says we shouldn't be doing abortions.

The right has you believing that women are completely cold and callous when we make these decisions when it's so much more complex than that.

Only the ones that are completely cold and callous when they make those decisions. See, unlike the woke, I don't judge people by category like that. Being a woman just means you're a woman, and aside from a few wholly biological factors, that is about the sum total of what that tells me about you. So, basically, it means absolutely nothing to me because it's not relevant to this discussion.

 

[Talga Vasternich]

Let me take a page out of the over zealous extreme right's playbook and say, "Not like that."

I don't ANYONE telling me what I can and do with my body because it's none of their goddamn business; whether I wanna whore it out or suck one genitalia for the rest of my life, my choice. We ALL (right wing, left wing, dark wing, whatever) deserve the right to privacy and autonomy and that's what's being taken away. The govt doesn't think that I, SOMEONE WHO MAKES HUMANS WITH MY BODY, should have privacy or autonomy. It feels the States do and it's wrong for several reasons:

You gestate humans in your body, which is of immeasurable value. The creation of life involves a male and female. Statements like this are used to downplay the role males play in reproduction, thereby making it easier to justify them not getting a say in whether or not a life they helped create is intentionally terminated. Yet, despite not having a legal say, they will be held legally responsible for the decision of the female if she decides to keep the child.

I’m all for bodily autonomy. There is debate whether or not a fetus is a part of a woman’s body or exists in addition a woman’s body as it is a separate life, even though it is entirely dependent on the woman for life for the first 5 months or so.

As far as privacy goes, my belief is… Privacy exists from general public and governmental interference for mother, father, and doctor(s) involved. The only exception, to me, would be for minors. Any minor seeking induced abortion must sign a waiver allowing for paternity of the aborted fetus to be established to determine whether or not criminal activity (****, incest, age-of-consent) existed to create the pregnancy.

1.) Half these states don't feel abortion should exist so they're gonna make that choice for us and take it away. How in the **** does that make sense?
2.) This isn't "small government." This is "Well, it shouldn't have happened in the first place because THINK OF THE UNBORN CHILDREN and we're tired of this. Let's let half our states make it illegal." And that's supposed to stop the pro-life quacks? No, they want to make abortion ban nationwide!

More states have laws protecting induced abortion as of today than ban it without exception or established timeframe by a factor of at least 3.

3.) "It's not a constitutional right," "It's not in the Constitution." Well neither are AR-15s SPECIFICALLY but they have more rights than I do.

I’ll bite. What legal rights does an AR-15s have that you do not?

4.) Take away the morality of this and abortion is a MEDICAL procedure. It should REMAIN just that and remain between a woman and her doctor in what to do. And, y'all, don't let Glurin tell y'all they kill babies up until they are born. Most abortions happen before 12 or 13 weeks. Anything after is wanted and something is severely and medically wrong if abortion is on the table.

If you were to write a law covering induced abortion, what would it be / include, or do you believe there should be no law covering this?

5.) This affects men too. Y'all may think it don't, but if you're married or with a gf and something fucked up happens to her... WTF you gonna do? Tell her she has to carry that child she don't want?? Oh, what a great guy you are.

I believe in laws involving reasonable timeframes, exceptions for criminal activity, endangerment of life, and fetal mortality and I have contacted my state (not federal as these issues are now being decided by individual states) representatives and both the governor and lieutenant governor of the state in which I live to tell them what I expect them to do concerning these laws if they expect my support and vote and have tried to influence others to do the same. I highly doubt more than tiny fraction of the people who are upset with this decision have done anything other than take to social media with their complaints, grievances, and fear mongering... yet expect those who create and modify the laws to do, unbidden, what they feel should be done.

6.) Why is it when it came to the COVID-19 vaccine it's my body my choice but with it comes to this everybody be all up in our wombs? Ironic much???

I’m all for informed consent for which there is a prerequisite understanding of potential consequences. Only when criminal activity is involved is the act of creating a life done without consent. Virtually everyone is detailing, in great length, potential short and long term consequences of pregnancy in these discussions, so I believe they are very common knowledge. What are all the potential short and long term consequences of the COVID-19 shots? Do you believe they are all known and are all common knowledge? There exists one very significant difference between the two.

7.) This isn't about "sAvInG tHe cHiLdReN!1" This is straight up control of women's bodies and forced birth.

When we tell men that they have to accept the result of their actions for a decision about which they get no legal say, why is it different for women?