Fetuses do not have rights. They’re not sentient, they’re not conscious, they’re not self aware. Even if they did have rights, nothing would give them the right to use another person’s body without that person’s permission. Actual born human beings don’t even have that right.
That’s because of this great thing called “bodily autonomy.” Bodily autonomy is basically the right to your own body, to decide who/what uses it, for what, and for how long. It’s why you can’t be forced to donate blood or organs, etc., even if you’re dead.
Fetuses do not have this.
Pregnant people do.
So if a pregnant person does not want a fetus using their body, guess what? The fetus can’t use their body.
Even if the fetus had all these rights as well (they don’t) it wouldn’t matter. Because it’s the fetus using the pregnant person and the pregnant person has the right to deny the fetus that use. It’s the pregnant person’s bodily autonomy that matters.
Don’t give a pregnant person less rights than a corpse.
They made their choice when they chose to become pregnant. The child deserves to live.
I don’t think most people seeking elective abortion chose to become pregnant.
In fact, I’m not sure anyone can actively choose to become pregnant.
Sex = pregnancy. Don’t have sex and you won’t get pregnant.
You can get pregnant even if you don’t have sex, you can have sex and not get pregnant. You can get pregnant without deciding to have sex. Deciding to have sex does not mean you decided to get pregnant.
Yes, the one adult gave permission to the other adult to have sex with them.
That would also constitute permission from the mother to the child. assuming for just a moment that OP isn’t a complete idiot with her “body autonomy” argument
Consent to one thing is not consent to another, and consent is not transferable from person to person. Consent must also be continuous and given freely. Even if you believe consent to sex is consent to pregnancy, the pregnant person could still revoke their consent, even if they had sex wanting to get pregnant. Unless you think consent cannot be revoked?
I think that grown adults know what causes children and that just because it’s inconvenient doesn’t mean that they get to change their mind . If you want to play, be prepared to pay
First, not only adults get pregnant. Plus, sexual education is inconsistent and can be lacking depending on the place. There are people that don’t even know condoms (or any other method of birth control) are not 100% effective, let alone that having protected sex could result in having a child. I believe there should be better access to affordable (free) and reliable methods of birth control, as well as better and more comprehensive sex ed courses that cover, among other things, all choices available regarding sexual intercourse and reproduction.
Second, reducing a person’s reason for getting an abortion down to an “inconvenience” is trivializing. It doesn’t matter if the person doesn’t want to be “inconvenienced,” they shouldn’t have to be “inconvenienced.”
Third, they do get to change their mind. At whatever time, for whatever reason. The pregnant person must consent to the fetus using their body for the entire pregnancy, otherwise their right to bodily autonomy would be violated.
Finally, this whole “pay” for “playing” thing shows you regard pregnancy and childbirth as punishment for having consensual sex.
No, most of the people who chose abortions see it as a punishment, that’s why they feel like they have a right to kill a baby. I’m not saying there aren’t reasons for it, I am saying that it is far too casual. I’m not saying a mothers life is less important than a baby’s, I’m not saying incest shouldn’t be a reason along with rape. I am saying that most grown adults know what they are doing, the baby didn’t make a choice.
Do you think a person shouldn’t be able to get an abortion if they had consensual sex, and that they should be able to in the case of rape or incest?
I don’t believe in abortion at all, but I understand that some instances are traumatic and abortion should be an option. But no, I do not believe that if you forgot your condom, or it failed snd now your life is inconvenienced that you should be allowed an abortion.
Most of the time we are talking about consenting adults who choose abortion in order to stay out of trouble, or not change their life, and at that point I believe the child has the greater claim
So you do think a person should be able to get an abortion if they were raped?
I do believe that if the woman can’t bring herself to carry the child of her rapist, it should be an option.
considering that rape and incest make up less than 4% of all abortions, yeah I will take a 96% reduction in abortions
Why do you think a person has the right to get an abortion if they were raped?
I don’t think it’s a right for someone who’s been raped to have an abortion I believe it’s a medical necessity.
Ok, then why is it a medical necessity? Why should the person be able to get an abortion?
Because rape is a terrible and traumatic event and sometimes the idea of carrying the child of your rapist is more than even a strong woman can handle. Which is completely different situation than oh my God look I’m pregnant now I have to put off college for a year or so what are my parents going to think Or sure this guy is nice to have had a date but I don’t think I want to have a baby with him so.
Also in the case of rape or incest it’s an event that was forced on the mother, she had no say in it, she didn’t decide for that to happen. Where is the other instances she knew what she was doing she went into it with her eyes open and the idea that hey I’m going to do this and one of the consequences is I could get pregnant.
So a person should be able to get an abortion because it would be traumatizing/difficult for them to be forced to stay pregnant with their rapist’s child?
That doesn’t sound like a medical necessity, that sounds like they have the right to get an abortion because it would be wrong to traumatized them.
No, it sounds like they were raped, against their will, and most times violently so no it’s not traumatic because they have to have a baby. It’s dramatic because they would constantly be reminded of that violent event in their life. That being said I would still encourage even the victims of rape and incest to carry the child to term if she could and give it up for adoption.
(That’s still not an abortion performed out of medical necessity, btw.)
So you would consider it traumatic for a person to be forced to have sex but not traumatic for them to be forced to stay pregnant? Why?
A person should be able to get an abortion because they were raped, why? What’s your entire argument? What gives them the right to abort the fetus? Would their rights be violated if they were forced to carry their rapist’s baby?
Because in most instances them becoming pregnant was their choice. they went into it willingly. They knew the risks of the actions they were taking. Forgive me if your life is inconvenienced at that point because you did something and it didn’t turn out the way you wanted it to.
That’s not an answer to any question I asked. We’re talking about abortions in the case of rape, you’re talking about consensual sex.
You are trying to draw a correlation between the trauma of a rape and the trauma of having a child I’m just pointing out that these two instances came about because of completely different circumstances
It’s almost like they would both be traumatic. Notice how you said “trauma of rape” and “trauma of having a child.” They would both be traumatic, as both would be forced on the person. They didn’t come about because of completely different circumstances, one could occur after the other (you could be forced to have sex and forced to stay pregnant) or they could not (you could have consensual sex and be forced to stay pregnant).
Either way, you have yet to present an argument as to why abortions in the case of rape are acceptable. Do you have one?
You keep throwing around the word ‘inconvenience’. Have you ever been pregnant? Have you ever gone through that? It’s far more than an ‘inconvenience’. The drive thru taking too long and putting me potentially late for work is an ‘inconvenience’. A child making me physically unable to keep down any meal of the day, sucking up my nutrients and making me go through every emotion in the span of three hours and then putting me out of work for two or more months at the rate of 50% of my paycheck IF I’M LUCKY ENOUGH FOR THAT is a HELL of a lot more than an ‘inconvenience’. That would push me and the child I ALREADY HAVE back into poverty and we’d likely lose our house. But yeah, pregnancy is totally an ‘inconvenience?’ Fuck off.
I only used the “trauma of rape line because that is what you were implying. what you want to overlook is that in the case of rape and incest the action or actions were forced on that person. in the case of an accidental pregnancy, it wasn’t. they made choices, they decided to do what they did and a baby was the result. I don’t believe that a baby should pay for your willing actions.
If you don’t want a baby, get protected, with the knowledge that it ISN’T 100% effective, or don’t have sex. it really is that simple. choices were made, now it’s time to own up to it and deal with the results. That baby wasn’t involved in your choices, but you were. and that baby shouldn’t pay because you made poor choices.
@exodusvonengel
I keep using the word inconvenience because that is how an unwanted pregnancy is viewed by a lot of people. wow, babies have to be nourished…who knew? oh wait, you did. So why in the hell did you do something stupid like getting pregnant again if you didn’t want another baby.
wait, babies are expensive? WHAT?!?! shocker, maybe you shouldn’t do what causes babies without a plan to take care of them.
so what you are telling me is that you are too lazy to be responsible and it’s just easier to kill a baby. Gotcha.
I would tell you to Fuck off, but you would probably end up with a baby and want to kill it.
Since you’ve avoided the question yet again, do you just not have an argument for why abortion is acceptable in the case of rape?
personally, I’m not 100% convinced that it should be, but I am pragmatic enough to realize that other people see it that way, so I am willing to take a long view and work for anything that reduces the total number of abortions.
Ok, so you believe it should be accessible because other people believe it should?
Lazy. Yeah, I’m lazy. I’m lazy for having a baby at 16 because I decided that abortion wasn’t right for me, and I’m lazy for having fought and clawed my way to a comfortable, lower middle class way of life now that he’s almost ten. I’m totally lazy for not wanting the possibility of having another baby at this point to put us in a homeless shelter because I, as a woman, dared to enjoy having sex a few times a year, while on birth control. I’m lazy for working 48 hour weeks to keep a roof over my goddamn head and not wanting another child to force me out of that.
My already born, living, breathing, video game playing 9 year old is more important to me to keep up than another baby who is none of those things. If I found out I was pregnant tomorrow, that my birth control failed, I don’t know what I would do, but abortion would be very high on that list. Because I’m too lazy to risk putting my son into poverty. Because I’m too lazy to have to try and continue working that 48 hours a week when I could barely make it through nine months of high school when I was pregnant before.
Fetuses do not have rights. They’re not sentient, they’re not conscious, they’re not self aware. Even if they did have rights, nothing would give them the right to use another person’s body without that person’s permission. Actual born human beings don’t even have that right.
That’s because of this great thing called “bodily autonomy.” Bodily autonomy is basically the right to your own body, to decide who/what uses it, for what, and for how long. It’s why you can’t be forced to donate blood or organs, etc., even if you’re dead.
Fetuses do not have this.
Pregnant people do.
So if a pregnant person does not want a fetus using their body, guess what? The fetus can’t use their body.
Even if the fetus had all these rights as well (they don’t) it wouldn’t matter. Because it’s the fetus using the pregnant person and the pregnant person has the right to deny the fetus that use. It’s the pregnant person’s bodily autonomy that matters.
Don’t give a pregnant person less rights than a corpse.
They made their choice when they chose to become pregnant. The child deserves to live.
I don’t think most people seeking elective abortion chose to become pregnant.
In fact, I’m not sure anyone can actively choose to become pregnant.
Sex = pregnancy. Don’t have sex and you won’t get pregnant.
You can get pregnant even if you don’t have sex, you can have sex and not get pregnant. You can get pregnant without deciding to have sex. Deciding to have sex does not mean you decided to get pregnant.
Yes, the one adult gave permission to the other adult to have sex with them.
That would also constitute permission from the mother to the child. assuming for just a moment that OP isn’t a complete idiot with her “body autonomy” argument
Consent to one thing is not consent to another, and consent is not transferable from person to person. Consent must also be continuous and given freely. Even if you believe consent to sex is consent to pregnancy, the pregnant person could still revoke their consent, even if they had sex wanting to get pregnant. Unless you think consent cannot be revoked?
I think that grown adults know what causes children and that just because it’s inconvenient doesn’t mean that they get to change their mind . If you want to play, be prepared to pay
First, not only adults get pregnant. Plus, sexual education is inconsistent and can be lacking depending on the place. There are people that don’t even know condoms (or any other method of birth control) are not 100% effective, let alone that having protected sex could result in having a child. I believe there should be better access to affordable (free) and reliable methods of birth control, as well as better and more comprehensive sex ed courses that cover, among other things, all choices available regarding sexual intercourse and reproduction.
Second, reducing a person’s reason for getting an abortion down to an “inconvenience” is trivializing. It doesn’t matter if the person doesn’t want to be “inconvenienced,” they shouldn’t have to be “inconvenienced.”
Third, they do get to change their mind. At whatever time, for whatever reason. The pregnant person must consent to the fetus using their body for the entire pregnancy, otherwise their right to bodily autonomy would be violated.
Finally, this whole “pay” for “playing” thing shows you regard pregnancy and childbirth as punishment for having consensual sex.
No, most of the people who chose abortions see it as a punishment, that’s why they feel like they have a right to kill a baby. I’m not saying there aren’t reasons for it, I am saying that it is far too casual. I’m not saying a mothers life is less important than a baby’s, I’m not saying incest shouldn’t be a reason along with rape. I am saying that most grown adults know what they are doing, the baby didn’t make a choice.
Do you think a person shouldn’t be able to get an abortion if they had consensual sex, and that they should be able to in the case of rape or incest?
I don’t believe in abortion at all, but I understand that some instances are traumatic and abortion should be an option. But no, I do not believe that if you forgot your condom, or it failed snd now your life is inconvenienced that you should be allowed an abortion.
Most of the time we are talking about consenting adults who choose abortion in order to stay out of trouble, or not change their life, and at that point I believe the child has the greater claim
So you do think a person should be able to get an abortion if they were raped?
I do believe that if the woman can’t bring herself to carry the child of her rapist, it should be an option.
considering that rape and incest make up less than 4% of all abortions, yeah I will take a 96% reduction in abortions
Why do you think a person has the right to get an abortion if they were raped?
I don’t think it’s a right for someone who’s been raped to have an abortion I believe it’s a medical necessity.
Ok, then why is it a medical necessity? Why should the person be able to get an abortion?
Because rape is a terrible and traumatic event and sometimes the idea of carrying the child of your rapist is more than even a strong woman can handle. Which is completely different situation than oh my God look I’m pregnant now I have to put off college for a year or so what are my parents going to think Or sure this guy is nice to have had a date but I don’t think I want to have a baby with him so.
Also in the case of rape or incest it’s an event that was forced on the mother, she had no say in it, she didn’t decide for that to happen. Where is the other instances she knew what she was doing she went into it with her eyes open and the idea that hey I’m going to do this and one of the consequences is I could get pregnant.
So a person should be able to get an abortion because it would be traumatizing/difficult for them to be forced to stay pregnant with their rapist’s child?
That doesn’t sound like a medical necessity, that sounds like they have the right to get an abortion because it would be wrong to traumatized them.
No, it sounds like they were raped, against their will, and most times violently so no it’s not traumatic because they have to have a baby. It’s dramatic because they would constantly be reminded of that violent event in their life. That being said I would still encourage even the victims of rape and incest to carry the child to term if she could and give it up for adoption.
(That’s still not an abortion performed out of medical necessity, btw.)
So you would consider it traumatic for a person to be forced to have sex but not traumatic for them to be forced to stay pregnant? Why?
A person should be able to get an abortion because they were raped, why? What’s your entire argument? What gives them the right to abort the fetus? Would their rights be violated if they were forced to carry their rapist’s baby?
Because in most instances them becoming pregnant was their choice. they went into it willingly. They knew the risks of the actions they were taking. Forgive me if your life is inconvenienced at that point because you did something and it didn’t turn out the way you wanted it to.
That’s not an answer to any question I asked. We’re talking about abortions in the case of rape, you’re talking about consensual sex.
You are trying to draw a correlation between the trauma of a rape and the trauma of having a child I’m just pointing out that these two instances came about because of completely different circumstances
It’s almost like they would both be traumatic. Notice how you said “trauma of rape” and “trauma of having a child.” They would both be traumatic, as both would be forced on the person. They didn’t come about because of completely different circumstances, one could occur after the other (you could be forced to have sex and forced to stay pregnant) or they could not (you could have consensual sex and be forced to stay pregnant).
Either way, you have yet to present an argument as to why abortions in the case of rape are acceptable. Do you have one?
You keep throwing around the word ‘inconvenience’. Have you ever been pregnant? Have you ever gone through that? It’s far more than an ‘inconvenience’. The drive thru taking too long and putting me potentially late for work is an ‘inconvenience’. A child making me physically unable to keep down any meal of the day, sucking up my nutrients and making me go through every emotion in the span of three hours and then putting me out of work for two or more months at the rate of 50% of my paycheck IF I’M LUCKY ENOUGH FOR THAT is a HELL of a lot more than an ‘inconvenience’. That would push me and the child I ALREADY HAVE back into poverty and we’d likely lose our house. But yeah, pregnancy is totally an ‘inconvenience?’ Fuck off.
Fetuses do not have rights. They’re not sentient, they’re not conscious, they’re not self aware. Even if they did have rights, nothing would give them the right to use another person’s body without that person’s permission. Actual born human beings don’t even have that right.
That’s because of this great thing called “bodily autonomy.” Bodily autonomy is basically the right to your own body, to decide who/what uses it, for what, and for how long. It’s why you can’t be forced to donate blood or organs, etc., even if you’re dead.
Fetuses do not have this.
Pregnant people do.
So if a pregnant person does not want a fetus using their body, guess what? The fetus can’t use their body.
Even if the fetus had all these rights as well (they don’t) it wouldn’t matter. Because it’s the fetus using the pregnant person and the pregnant person has the right to deny the fetus that use. It’s the pregnant person’s bodily autonomy that matters.
Don’t give a pregnant person less rights than a corpse.
There’s going to be a new “pro-life” anti-abortion law in Poland. And it’s horrible. It’s disgusting, it treats women in a horrible way and there have already been protests. Please read this post about it. Please. What follows is my translation of a Facebook post that now has over 23k shares and which very clearly explains the whole thing. Please spend 5 minutes of your time reading it to know what might happen to your Polish followers or friends.
“A conceived child is a human being in a prenatal state, from the moment the female gamete and male gamete connect” - this is what the project of a new legal act states. So far it has been approved by the episcopate, the prime minister (who is a woman by the way) and the leader of the current ruling political party. (…)
It doesn’t affect only women. Everyone single one of us has a sister, a cousin, a mother, a colleague from work, a neighbour, a teacher, an employer or an employee - and all of these women will be affected by this new law. Women get pregnant. And sooner or later, you or a woman you know, might get pregnant and suffer because of this new law. (…)
The Criminal Code will get a new section: “the prenatal murder”, for which one will get from 3 months up to 5 years of prison. And for this crime, everyone could be convicted: the mother, the doctor, and every person who helped - your friend who brought you emergency contraceptives bought in another country or your friend who let you stay in her house while you were getting an abortion in Czech Republic.
If the crime is involuntary, the punishment is up to 3 years of prison. The judge will be able to refrain from jail punishment. By “involuntary” the law means a miscarriage. A miscarriage in a situation where a woman didn’t actively want to lose the baby, but “by her unwise actions she lead to her child’s death”.
If you are dumb enough to stick a fucking hanger in your vagina then that’s your problem. No one is forcing you
Translation: I don’t personally understand why someone would be desperate enough to try to attempt an unsafe abortion so it must be because they’re dumb, and dumb people deserve to suffer for some reason. And that’s how I rationalize my gross lack of empathy for people in desperate situations.
But she’s a Christian, y'all! Just so much love and compassion. -V
Pro-lifers in a nutshell, tbh.
They honestly hate pregnant people.
No, I hate murder.
Murder isn’t what you’re ending here. It’s pregnant people’s life. Like, you openly said you don’t care if it kills them, and that they deserve it.
But okaaaaay. That isn’t murder but I think you know that, and that’s why you’re backing up from saying “i don’t hate pregnant people.”
Just own it man, we all understood ya. lol
It is murder. You are ending the life of something once living due to inconvenience.
But great point.
My cousin was born with holes in her heart. She is pro life. A pregnancy could kill her. Solution, a hysterectomy covered by insurance. There are so many ways to prevent pregnancies rather terminate them, it is ridiculous to think abortions exist.
So really, sounds to me that you hate babies and fetal life. Just say it.
Great for your cousin. She has insurance. She has the time and desire to have and recover from a majorly invasive surgery. She’s found a doctor willing to do it for her (I’ve tried to have my tubes tied and been laughed out of the doc’s office for being “too young”). I’m seriously happy for her that she found a way to avoid pregnancy entirely, but you need to realize that not everyone is your cousin.
-V
“My cousin’s life is obviously the same as everyone else!”
Er, fantastic, but the majority of doctors aren’t willing to tie someone’s tubes (especially young people) and not everyone has insurance. Not to mention that even when you do have insurance, not all of them are going to cover the procedure if they don’t find it medically necessary so, your solution that people should get their tubes tied makes no sense. Feel free to take several seats until you have a valid point to make.
-Allie
My cousin has severe Ehlers Danlos combined with scoliosis and a pregnancy could kill or cripple her. She has yet to find a doctor that will tie her tubes despite being in her early 30s. But yeah, everything in the por-life universe is SOOOO easy!
Most doctors hate tying any woman’s tubes unless she’s past “childbearing age” or already has three children. Lucky for that one person whose cousin managed to find a doctor so they could use it as proof that there are, again, “better ways then abortion”. Because obviously everyone is the same, and everyone’s life conditions means that they could actually support a child and they’re just getting an abortion out of spite. You know, rather then many many other reasons in their personal lives, that probably won’t effect anyone outside of their lives in any way shape or form. But hey, foetuses matter first right?
Life matters. You’re saying that if it were you or your mother, that’d you’d be chill with her just dumping you in the blender? Sure. And that isn’t true. My mother had her tubes tied at 36 after the twins birth. She was so fertile that the doctor said she was unable of having single kids anymore. 36 is a pretty old age for having kids
I’m pretty sure at my age, as an adult, it would be pretty hard for her to dump me in a blender now if thats what you mean. But before I was even born when I was literally a zygote with no feelings, knowledge, memory or sentience? Yeah, actually, I’d be totally chill with that because you know I wouldn’t exist? Thats the whole point? Unless you have memories that extend as far back as when you were literally just a day from being two separate cells, I’m pretty sure no-one, including you twinkle-toes, has ever been conscious and feeling as a foetus. Plus that shows complete ignorance of the way abortions are actually performed, because unless the doctors happen to be vampires looking for a gory milkshake, I highly doubt a clump of cells would be dumped in a blender but you know, not like I actually took biology or researched abortion from non-biased sources. Also furthermore, it may actually have served my mother and heck even my existence better if she had made that choice. Because of my birth, my existence, my mother had to give up all of her hobbies, a decent job, a decent home, and live with herself at the minimum, especially since she never wanted children in the goddamn first place but because of listening to society and complete idiots she decided to sacrifice her bodily autonomy for my father’s sake. Whats more, because of this, I grew up hearing that I was unintentional, that my mother originally didn’t want children, that she’d totally missed out on her dreams because of my existence. No matter how much she loves me, that can’t make up for the guilt and misery I’ve felt when I’m reminded that she could’ve done better in her life without me.
If I was given a choice between a peaceful “death”, with absolutely no conscience, knowledge, memories or concepts of life at all, and forcing my mother through agony and making her lose out on her life, I would choose the former yes. But then again I really don’t know why pro-lifers always ask me this dumb question because when I do answer it they’re always shocked, since their concepts of existence, life and philosophy are so messed up they think a clump of cells has more concept value than a life that has grown and experienced and learned and lived and loved and could do so much more. So well done you reached sarcastic me with you idiocy. I applaud you for your guts but you’re literally acting like a wind-up toy placed in front of a wall.
P.S. No matter how “young” you think thirty-six may be, how do you think the people younger then that are going to have their tubes tied? I’ve been denied every time I’ve asked, even laughed at by doctors, in a country where it is a free option, covered by insurance, for everyone. I’m extremely tokophobic and I would kill myself rather then be forced through pregnancy and labour, and doctors won’t grant me that wish. So yeah, I’m sure everyone is comparable to people “past childbearing age” (yes according to the doctors I’ve talked to, thirty is the cut off age for child-bearing) and people who have met the lucky few doctors who would grant them this privilege, all under insurance.
This practically made me cry. How could this ever be okay?
[Image: An illustration is labeled as a “partial birth abortion". It shows a person performing an intact dilation and extraction, which is described at the bottom of the image: “The surgeon pulls the fetus into the breech position. He forced scissors into the skull, removes them and inserts a suction catheter through which he suctions out the skull contents.“]
I’m going to tell you a story that my tenth grade biology teacher told me.
So, my teacher had a friend. She was happily married, a Christian, and pregnant. She and her husband were extremely excited about the pregnancy and they couldn’t wait to be parents. She was pretty far along - probably about 7 month in. She went to get a check-up, and her doctor checked out the fetus. Well, it turns out her fetus had hydrochephalus. In this particular case, the fetus’s head had not and would not form enough to even hold the brain inside the skull. If the woman continued the pregnancy, she would give birth to a dead baby, and that’s if it didn’t die in utero and possibly cause sepsis before she had the opportunity to give birth.
So, and this was before the “partial birth abortion ban” was enacted (not when the story was told, but when it took place), the woman opted to get an intact dilation and extraction procedure (since that’s the proper medical term, “partial birth abortion" is a made up term and has no medical relevance).
Do you know what that allowed her to do? What that allows a lot of uterus-bearers in the same predicament to do?
She was able to hold her dead, intact fetus and mourn for it.
Now, she would have to get a procedure that literally rips the fetus apart, since apparently anti-choicers looking for a means to chip away at Roe v Wade think that this is a better alternative to the described procedure above. As the law currently stands, it is now impossible for people like the woman I described to have their fetuses aborted intact so that they can hold them like they wanted to. It is impossible for women like the one I described to have a body to mourn over.
So good job. Because you’re too ignorant to actually know why uterus-bearers get late-term abortion, specifically intact D & X procedures, you’ve essentially made it much harder for those that are experiencing the difficult choice to end a wanted pregnancy to mourn and move on.
But hey, go ahead and continue to consider yourself compassionate. I guess ignorance really is bliss, especially when you can hold up illustrations of medical procedures you don’t understand and hide behind them as if they have any meaning in the face of the reality that you refuse to acknowledge.
^^woah
Daily reminder that pro life people don’t actually care about pregnant people.
At 23 weeks chances are good that this fetus is being removed because it is:
a) Already dead b) Suffering abnormalities such as it developed no brain, or had a serious genetic condition that would kill it quickly. c) Was actively dying (not dead yet but would be within a few days, 100% guarunteed, 0 chance of saving it) d) Was actively killing the pregnant person.
Late term abortions, as shown here, make up only 1.5% of all abortions. The above four reasons are the only reasons such procedures are performed. Almost every abortion performed after 20 weeks is done on a wanted pregnancy. So you know what that means? You’re calling people who miscarried murderers. You just implied people who had a miscarriage or would have died murderers. How dare you call yourself pro life for that.
Now for the fun fact: They used to use a different procedure for these abortions in which they removed the fetus intact and allowed these people to grieve for the intact fetus, have pictures, etc. Pro lifers decided people losing a wanted pregnancy should not be allowed to grieve an intact fetus and we were left with this.
Congrats. Your movement is the reason they use this one now when people lose a wanted pregnancy late into the pregnancy. Your movement is intentionally making it harder for people to recover from the lose of a much wanted pregnancy. It’s your movement who left grieving people with this instead of allowing them something easier to deal with, something that would let them hold their deceased fetus.
Congrats. If you think you were ‘saving’ something think again. You’re hurting born people. You’re hurting people who lose a wanted pregnancy by shaming this abortion procedure. And you’re movement is the reason this is procedure doctors are forced to use now. You’re probably an awful and mean person to tell people losing a wanted pregnancy that they’re killers.
This is the post that made me pro-choice. Glad to see it still circulating.
I lost a baby brother at something like 14 weeks because he’d attached to the uterine wall backward, and when he started kicking he tore himself away and hemorrhaged to death.
You goddamn “pro-lifers” were ready to let my mother die with him rather than “killing him before God’s time.” He was already dead; it was a matter at that point of him bleeding out. My mother was bleeding with him. My mother was dying with him. And the hospital she was in? That fine pro-life hospital? Refused to let her transfer to another hospital to abort. She had a ten-year-old and an eight-month old at home, but making sure Joey didn’t die “before God’s time” was more goddamn important than making sure my mother survived.
My mother asked the nurse if she’d take pictures, saying that the ultrasound images were really blurry and she’d at least like something to remember him by. The nurse, after Joey was dead and my mom was in recovery, threw pictures on my mother’s bed. This fine pro-life nurse gave my mother pictures of a baby that was jet black where he wasn’t blood red. He didn’t even look human. And she threw the pictures in my mother’s face, like it was her fault that there was a terrible, terrible biological mistake that made it impossible for her baby to survive.
We wanted him. Not that the fact that you’ll notice he already had a name picked out would’ve clued you in. I would have had a baby brother just a year younger than me. My sophomore year in college I spent a lot of time crying alone in the student union, thinking it wasn’t right, it wasn’t fair, I should be taking my brother to dinner with friends or helping him study for his first midterms. I’m a big sister with no little brother to show for it, and there was a year that pain and loss came back eighteen years after the fact to wound me when I least expected it. There was a year when there were songs I couldn’t bring myself to listen to without crying because they reminded me of what I could have had. And I still wish, I still wish, they’d aborted him. Because the end result would have been the same. And my family would have been spared a world of pain believing we were losing brother and mother both. I was in ICU at the time after an allergic reaction that left me unable to breathe. How do you suppose my sister felt? Mother dying, sister dying, brother dead—just a matter of time on that one. Ten years old, watching her entire family struggling to breathe, struggling to live.
And you motherfuckers would call my mom a murderer for this. And you cared more for a baby already dying than you did for the two already born who needed their mom.
Fuck you. You’re not pro-life. You’re anti-woman, anti-family, anti-compassion and anti-love.
Someone on my FB shared this photo and I had to go sit in silence for awhile at the stupidity of her comment that went along with it. Most people don’t wait so late into a pregnancy and randomly decide ‘kill the baby’ because they want to. What the fuck is wrong with people.
