- Joined
- Dec 6, 2020
Ah, I see you have one of those editors on watch. Keep an eye out on this category to see if anyone else "identifies" as such.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Ah, I see you have one of those editors on watch. Keep an eye out on this category to see if anyone else "identifies" as such.
But they will be born.
Anyone who has studied constitutional law with any level of seriousness knew it was a dubious precedent, despite having been affirmed and re-affirmed, at least on paper, while chiseling away at the specific protections it offered.Like I said upthread, RBG was teaching that it was a terrible precedent, while she was still teaching. And as @Amber the Hedgehog pointed out, abortion activism used to be about "Safe, legal, and rare", with at least some expectation of responsibility on the part of both parties. Sex Ed was supposed to discuss how to use birth control properly, but now it's turned into teaching k-3 about "non-binary queer trans identities", and 4-7 about anal and oral sex, instead of not having sex as 8-through-12 year old children.
Any time I see some stupid fucker say this, my first thought is YOU can be replaced, and that I'd like to take all their shit and just laugh at them and say lmao you can just replace it. It is impossible to express the depth of my loathing of shit humans like this.
They wouldn't be there had their mothers had an abortion and they'll "RRRrrreee" more when they'll read that article.
May 4, 2022
Yes, abortion is infanticide
By Mark C. Ross
Infanticide has always been a serious component of the ugly side of human nature. Archaeologists have done a lot of digging in Ashkelon, an ancient town in what is typically known as the Holy Land. They found the town's sewer, and, in a bend in the channel, they found a pile of infant skeletons. Forensic analysis could not find any congenital defects in the remains. It has thus been assumed that the local residents were disposing of their unwanted children.
Fast-forward to our modern world. We have a judicial edict that no state can outlaw pregnancy termination. Hence, for the last half-century, every time a Supreme Court Justice sneezes...the Roe v. Wade partisans, on both sides, line up in full battle regalia.
It used to be that the several states would individually license and thus regulate medical practice. Then, suddenly, a particularly controversial practice was mandated, regardless of local opinion.
Should Roe be overturned, then the states would be free to adopt their own policies. Should Nevadans be denied access to pregnancy termination, then various facilities in California would likely be able to deal with them. The beauty of our federal system — the composite structure of jurisdictions — allows for a politically expedient lack of uniformity.
Lurking beneath this persistent controversy is the profound innocence of infants. They have no voice to defend themselves. So others adopt the cause. And yet, definitions are constantly being challenged.
That number is also seriously inflated for us and downgraded for the other "First World" nations.
I bet Kate (and these others) wouldn't like it if I tweeted at them "told ya so" if the leaked draft turns out to be just that and has nothing to do with the eventual majority opinion.
Meanwhile, all people with BLACKED accounts on PornHub are looking like this
I've never seen an abortion restriction law that would involve any of these cases. They always have an exception for the mother's health (I'm not sure you actually could successfully criminalize otherwise) and I couldn't see a situation where even a misreading of a poorly drafted laws leads to someone getting charged for removing an already dead fetus.Some copypasta on Facebook.
I'm not pro-murdering babies.
I'm pro-Becky who found out at her 20 week anatomy scan that the infant she had been so excited to bring into this world had developed without life sustaining organs.
I'm pro-Theresa who hemorrhaged due to a placental abruption, causing her parents, spouse, and children to have to make the impossible decision on whether to save her or her unborn child.
I'm pro-Vanessa who went into her confirmation appointment after YEARS of trying to conceive only to hear silence where there should be a heartbeat.
I'm pro-Courtney who just found out she's already 13 weeks along, but the egg never made it out of her fallopian tube so either she terminates the pregnancy or risks dying from internal bleeding.
That's 12 very extreme hypothetical situations out of the 600,000 abortions that happen in the US. I am pretty sure that even the most extreme anti-abortion proponents will agree that abortion is a legitimate medical option for half of these because the mother's life is in danger.Some copypasta on Facebook.
I'm not pro-murdering babies.
I'm pro-Becky who found out at her 20 week anatomy scan that the infant she had been so excited to bring into this world had developed without life sustaining organs.
I'm pro-Susan who was sexually assaulted on her way home from work, only to come to the horrific realization that her assailant planted his seed in her when she got a positive pregnancy test result a month later.
I'm pro-Theresa who hemorrhaged due to a placental abruption, causing her parents, spouse, and children to have to make the impossible decision on whether to save her or her unborn child.
I'm pro-little Cathy who had her innocence ripped away from her by someone she should have been able to trust and her 11 year old body isn't mature enough to bear the consequence of that betrayal.
I'm pro-Melissa who's working two jobs just to make ends meet and has to choose between bringing another child into poverty or feeding the children she already has because her spouse walked out on her.
I'm pro-Brittany who realizes that she is in no way financially, emotionally, or physically able to raise a child.
I'm pro-Emily who went through IVF, ending up with SIX viable implanted eggs requiring selective reduction in order to ensure the safety of her and a SAFE amount of fetuses.
I'm pro-Christina who doesn't want to be a mother, but birth control methods sometimes fail.
I'm pro-Jessica who is FINALLY getting the strength to get away from her physically abusive spouse only to find out that she is carrying the monster's child.
I'm pro-Vanessa who went into her confirmation appointment after YEARS of trying to conceive only to hear silence where there should be a heartbeat.
I'm pro-Lindsay who lost her virginity in her sophomore year with a broken condom and now has to choose whether to be a teenage mom or just a teenager.
I'm pro-Courtney who just found out she's already 13 weeks along, but the egg never made it out of her fallopian tube so either she terminates the pregnancy or risks dying from internal bleeding.
I am pro-Tina, who is homeless, skill less, and eating out of dumpsters while she looks for a way to keep her clump of developing cells to ever become a human life.
You can argue and say that I'm pro-choice all you want, but the truth is:
I'm pro-life.
Their lives.
Women's lives.
You don't get to pick and choose which scenarios should be accepted.
Women's rights are meant to protect ALL women, regardless of their situation!
#roevwade #prochoice #abortion #women #womensrights #mybody #mychoice #mybodymychoice
Then I found this on Twitter
lmaoReady for more melodrama?
View attachment 3249230
According to USA Today, women and minorities are under attack.
Actually many laws that are very iffy about what counts as danger for the mother. Pretty much all laws make exception when the mothers life is in danger but many don't allow abortion just for her health. Sometimes this goes as far as laws requiring immediate danger of death and so prevent timely action even though the eventual danger is clear or the baby isn't going to live. There are even some that are confusing like, you aren't allowed to abort in case of out uterus pregnancy but are allowed to remove the fallopian tube with a fetus becouse technically you aren't killing an unborn, just having surgery to remove miss functioning bodypart that has some unfortunate consequences. Never mind that that pregnancy is unviable, surgery is more dangerous than abortion and this will fuck up fertility unnecessarily.View attachment 3249221
View attachment 3249222
View attachment 3249223
View attachment 3249225
View attachment 3249226
I've never seen an abortion restriction law that would involve any of these cases. They always have an exception for the mother's health (I'm not sure you actually could successfully criminalize otherwise) and I couldn't see a situation where even a misreading of a poorly drafted laws leads to someone getting charged for removing an already dead fetus.
I don't know why people make their own bad arguments worse. Well, okay, I know why they do. I just mean why they think they're improving them by throwing in everything they can think of as if it will be the GOTCHA tipping point.
Maybe the argument is that without abortion being unrestricted in any way (which is currently the law nowhere) doctors will ignore their oath and ethics to leave these women to die?
Read G. E. M. Anscombe and the Doctrine of Double Effect (which explains why some cases of abortions are justified while most are not) instead. For the pro-choice side, read Philipa Foot, who argues purely from Normative Ethics without the fashionable "patriarchy hates women" agitprop. Peter Singer is more radically pro-choice, although still argues within a Utilitarian framework -- though I suspect, because Singer is not a uterus-haver, "philosophers" like Kate Manne who worship "standpoint epistemology" will simply find his argument inadmissible.
Allowing a pregnancy to proceed to term, even in healthy cases, ALWAYS puts the woman at greater risk, and does her body greater harm, than a professional-supervised abortion. Hence the medical proviso for abortion, unless carefully formulated, is no more than a rubber stamp.Actually many laws that are very iffy about what counts as danger for the mother. Pretty much all laws make exception when the mothers life is in danger but many don't allow abortion just for her health. Sometimes this goes as far as laws requiring immediate danger of death and so prevent timely action even though the eventual danger is clear or the baby isn't going to live.
They're citing maternal mortality, not infant mortality. Two entirely different things.That number is also seriously inflated for us and downgraded for the other "First World" nations.
Some of them don't count it as infant mortality if the baby lives for less than a few hours or even days.
This one goes into the fact that 60% of our infant mortality rate is in children that survive less than 28 days. Now, if you know the massive amount of effort Americans go to keep babies alive, you'll start to see where things push the numbers up when you add in poor prenatal care, poor diet, and drug/alcohol abuse.
A baby that is found in a trashcan and dies of exposure is added to those numbers also.
So are infacides.
But, here's a good article.
![]()
What do we know about infant mortality in the U.S. and comparable countries? - Peterson-KFF Health System Tracker
Infant mortality (the death of an infant within the first year of life) is a widely-reported indicator of population health. This chart collection highlights key infant mortality trends and demographic variation within the United States and also explores infant mortality rates in the U.S...www.healthsystemtracker.org