You see, the mistake is thinking that the goal is to protect children. The goal is to punish women for exercising agency. If a woman gets pregnant, there should be a baby. If there isn't, she's cheating, and there will be consequences.
They don't actually care.
It's about control, not about respecting life.
Don’t a handful of them want votes from people who believe the world is literally 6000 years old?
OK, that would be about control, though political control.
There is probably one Texan legislator, at least, who also believes the 6000 year thing and could pass a lie detector for “do you really believe God breathes souls into life at conception?“
Now… Could they pass a lie detector for “do you promise you would never pay for your mistress to fly out of state for an abortion?“
Can’t say no for sure… 🤥
(Cautioning overestimating malice in a way that underestimates superstition.)
They're not shocked, mainly because it's not about the children, it was never about the children.
It's about exercising control over the choices a woman can make.
Listen fellas, you make your choice about having a kid when you get freaky without protection. After that point, you've made your bed. I know, it sucks, because a horny brain is not a brain that makes rational decisions. I'm sorry about that.
You can give your opinion on whether to keep or terminate the pregnancy, but ultimately it's up to the lady in the scenario to make the final call. You can, and absolutely should have an opinion on the matter, you can and should be heard; but make no mistake, it's entirely her decision. If she chooses to go against what you want, your choice becomes: step up and be a dad, or pay to remove yourself from the situation. Alternatively (if you want the kid and she wants to terminate), continue with this person, and if she changes her mind about kids, try again, or find someone who will bear your offspring. You can't force her into one decision or the other... At least you can't, short of illegal actions, or by living in a state that forbids abortion.... I guess.
I will never agree with taking away a woman's right to choose. Unwanted pregnancy is, in my opinion, taking away her right to choose entirely. The woman doesn't always have a choice in whether she partakes in a sexual act or if protection is used. As much as any person who forces another to engage in unwanted sexual activity, should be prosecuted to the fullest extent allowable by law, until they're caught, there's a nontrivial chance of someone being violated and ending up with an unwanted parasite. Taking someone's choice to terminate that pregnancy, away from them, is, for all intents and purposes, IMO, psychological torture.
There's a ton more I can say about it, but bluntly, anyone still reading, and not furiously typing a response about how I'm evil for wanting abortion to be legal, already knows all about it. Her body, her choice. Until such a time that we can communicate with a fetus to determine whether it wants to live or not, the only voice that matters is hers.
You're my new favorite person. Thank you for this.
My sister supported abortion before she transitioned and she says that she was a creepy white knight when she supported it.
I do everything I can not to white knight about anything.
I support the right to choose. I support women's rights, and I support bodily autonomy for everyone.
Once you have the choice, then you can do with that whatever you want. If you want my opinion on a specific scenario, I'll provide it, I have no issue with that, but final decisions are up to the individual who is responsible for that decision, the person who will live with the consequences of that choice.
Conservatives:
Guns don't hurt people, PEOPLE hurt people.
Also conservatives:
THESE BOOKS ARE GONNA HURT PEOPLE!
Ahh, I see, you this seems to be a simple spelling error. The books are going to hurt profits.
This would be accurate if they ever cared about neonatal or prenatal health.. They don't.
Infant mortality being sky-high is completely fine. Mothers with no supports, nutrition, or health care? Fine. A baby can die in utero as a result of neglect and they'd say it was God's will, or rather that it's God's will that they not pay taxes for health care.
A baby can die in utero as a result of neglect and they’d say it was God’s will
and then prosecute the person whose uterus it was for "terminating" the pregnancy (even if we remove the neglect factor, also much of "neglect" is just poverty and lack of community and social support, which they promote under the guise of "nuclear family"), and the doctors involved for delivering the dead foetus, and maybe even give someone a hefty reward for reporting them.
And yet abortion being legal isn't god's will. Weird how their omnipotent god needs them to do everything for him.
They claim to be "pro life", but the second the baby is born, they stop giving a shit, otherwise, they'd be in favor of universal social services.
They need to start being called "anti-choice" or "pro-control" instead by the masses. Too long has the right been able to set the narrative in this country (mainly because the opposing party is purposefuly weak, as the phrase "when they go low, we go high" embodies), and it keeps getting more damaging as time goes on.
If they’re anything like my father, they’ll deny the findings as a liberal agenda to attack conservative righteousness.
You can’t win with these assholes.
They. Don't. Care.
They never did.
No they do care. The cruelty is fully intentional.
That's an Aussie outback hat, not a Texas cowboy hat lol
I only know this because I wear an outback hat often and regularly get accused of being a cowboy by small children.
Not to mention death / trauma to the mothers. The single most fucked up thing I've ever seen was being called in to do a c-section on a women who needed an abortion and never got one. We extracted a dead, partially decomposed baby from this woman's abdomen. This was almost a decade ago and that shit still haunts me. It'll haunt the mother for the rest of her life.
This was before women lost their reproductive rights with Roe v Wade, so idk why she never got one initially. Might have been a religious thing?
When we lost Roe v Wade, one of my immediate concerns was that we'd see an explosion of these types of cases across the country.
GOP legislation is straight up evil.
This won't change any minds in Texas because the anti abortion position is that every aborted baby should already be added to the infant mortality rate. Thus, from their perspective, the mortality rate has either not changed or decreased.
I think we should start using Snidely for these types of things.
It fits the Republican MO
How many doctors are treating patients who are in grave danger but can't even inform them because the treatment is now illegal?
Shit states gonna shit state
Wtjwtjwjegk
