Anti-Choice Democrat Rushes to Bring Abortion Bill to Texas Senate Floor as Protestors Gather Again


Update, June 24, 6:40 p.m. EST: After Sen. Glenn Hegar’s motion to suspend the 24-hour rule failed Monday afternoon—Lucio ultimately did not end up siding with the GOP on the motion—the senate recessed until 7 p.m. CST. SB 5 will be taken up tomorrow morning at 11 a.m. CST, at which point Texas’ dedicated crowd of protestors are asked to show up once again, wearing orange.

Update, June 24, 3:46 p.m. EST: Sen. Eddie Lucio has reportedly said he will no longer pursue the suspension of the 24-hour rule, while Sen. Leticia Van De Putte makes her way back from her father’s wake to Austin. Van De Putte sent a letter to Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, president of the senate, asking him to give her an hour and a half’s notice on any votes or motions. Dewhurst replied: I’m sorry for your loss, but nope. We’re still waiting to be notified as to when the senate will return to the floor this afternoon.

See all our coverage of the “people’s filibuster” against HB 60 here.

An anti-choice Democrat in Texas appears to be taking advantage of the death of one of his colleagues’ father in order to suspend a rule that would bring an omnibus anti-abortion bill to the senate floor sooner than expected. The bill would, in part, shut down all but five abortion clinics in the entire state and ban abortion after 20 weeks.

Eddie Lucio (D-Harlingen) is joining his Republican colleagues to suspend the senate’s 24-hour rule in order to bring the bill to the floor this afternoon, which will force Democrats into a lengthier filibuster. Lucio would not be able to suspend the rule if Sen. Leticia Van De Putte were present to vote against the suspension, but her father was killed in a car accident on Friday morning and she is attending to family matters in San Antonio today.

Fervent opposition to SB 5 has rallied Texans over the past few days; hundreds turned out for a “people’s filibuster” on Thursday night but were turned away by the State Affairs Committee chairman who grew tired of what he called “repetitive” testimony against anti-choice and anti-woman bills.

Yesterday, an estimated 1,000 Texans, clad in bright orange, swarmed capitol hallways and the house gallery to protest that body’s hearing of the bill. Of those, hundreds stayed until 3:30 a.m. Monday morning to watch as Democrats proposed amendments aimed at addressing the root causes of unplanned pregnancy (through funding for comprehensive sex education in schools) and reducing the share of uninsured in Texas by adopting federal Medicaid expansion.

Rep. Jodie Laubenberg, the anti-choice bill’s sponsor in the house, rejected those amendments, as well as an amendment from Rep. Senfronia Thompson (D-Houston) that would make an exception to the bill’s 20-week abortion ban for victims of rape and incest. Thompson punctuated her amendment by hanging a wire coat hanger on her microphone. Laubenberg was unmoved, telling Thompson she couldn’t support her amendment because “In the emergency room, they have what’s called rape kits, where a woman can get cleaned out.”

Horrified opponents of SB 5 are already gathering to raise a wall of orange in the senate gallery this afternoon. They’re running on a few hours’ sleep but ready to stick around until the wee hours if necessary.

As Rep. Dawnna Dukes told protestors who stuck around until after 3 a.m. this morning: a few hours at the capitol is nothing compared to nine months of forced pregnancy.

Like this story? Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

To schedule an interview with contact director of communications Rachel Perrone at rachel@rhrealitycheck.org.

Follow Andrea Grimes on twitter: @andreagrimes

  • AZDem9933

    Is there a possibility this Lucio guy can be primaried?

    • Limeade Youth

      yes and no. He might lose a primary to a more liberal candidate, who would promptly be trounced by a R who’s even more conservative than Lucio.

      • Phil Perspective

        How do you figure? What’s his district like?

      • colleen2

        That would be fine. I refuse to send any money to the Democratic party until they stop using it to further the political careers of men and women like this. All my political contributions are to individuals and organizations I trust. It is the ONLY way to discourage ‘centrists’ intent on keeping the women folks in our place.

        • AZDem9933

          I too am tired of the party tolerating anti-choicers in our midst. When someone here in AZ gives me the “big tent” line I ask them if that means we also have to welcome the anti-immigrant pro-SB1070 and Joe Arpaio Democrats into our tent as well.

          • Jonathan Kuperberg

            Democrats have lost many state and local elections because of people pushing abortion litmus tests and/or pro-homosexual litmus tests on conservative communities, only for the voters to tell them to take their values home and vote in the Republican prepared to respect community standards.on social issues. When this happens, they will often do damage to the poor and immigrants. Is that really what you want?

          • Rachel

            Huh? What?

          • AZDem9933

            “When this happens, they will often do damage to the poor and immigrants. Is that really what you want?”

            Thanks for proving my point, Jonathan. Racism is unacceptable as a Democrat but it’s still just fine to be bigoted against women and gays as long as you’re from a “conservative district”.

          • Jonathan Kuperberg

            You come out with things like that and then wonder why people talk about “outside agitators” and “forcing San Francisco values on the heartland” and “interfering liberal urban elites”? And why people don’t vote a straight ticket? That explains it for you. I am often told liberals are moderate and prepared to compromise and conservatives are gung-ho extremists, but obviously that doesn’t hold for the likes of you or what I’ve called the “cosmopolitan litmus test enforcers”.

            The GOP are currently in a tailspin because they thought they could impose Mississippi values on the nation, by pushing a Far Right national platform and wingnut/teabagger candidates in otherwise winnable state races. Can you not see the fallacy in wanting your side to fall into the exact mirror image of that trap?

            If you’re pro-economic justice, pro-immigrant rights, pro-homosexual and pro-abortion and you have a choice between picking a likely winning Democratic candidate who ticks the first two boxes or losing to a Republican who ticks zero, how can you justify primarying the Blue Dog for an unbending culture warrior?

          • AZDem9933

            Okay, so then I can pick the Democrat who checks the pro-choice, pro gay rights boxes but who also thinks Sheriff Joe Arpaio is a hero and “illegals” should be rounded up and deported and it’s all good, right? Big tent should be big enough for the racist Democrats (they still exist) if it’s big enough for those who hate women and gays.

          • Jonathan Kuperberg

            “who hate women and gays”- False equivalency of policy positions into hatred of the person, typical feature of absolutism- or “extremism” as you refer to it when the GOP does it. I would not want an outright misogynist or gay-hater (or racist) in either party, they should NOT be in public office if they hate some of their constituents for something they can’t control.

          • fiona64

            Actually, misogyny and homophobia are part and parcel of the same thing: rigid concepts about gender roles. So, yes. Hating women and gays is 100 percent equivalent.

            I do concur with you that such individuals should not hold public office … but that’s a discussion for another time.

          • Jonathan Kuperberg

            I did not say that misogyny and homophobia are separatable, they usually aren’t. I was saying that policy positions (anti-abortion or anti-same sex unions) do not equal “hate”… that’s an overblown false equivalency.

          • AZDem9933

            Policies that lead to women and gay people being harmed are hateful, period.

          • fiona64

            Well, perhaps “hate” is a strong word … but they are indeed bigotry. When there is no compelling state interest in taking away a person’s right to free association or bodily autonomy (or, if you like, the ability to make medical decisions without some unrelated third party sticking their nose in it), well … that’s pretty apparent bigotry. No one is going around, for example, saying that men have no right to their full range of health services.

          • Ann Peterson

            Actually the health insurance nonmedical bean counters do that to men, women and children everyday.

          • fiona64

            Perhaps where you live; in other places, that is not the case.

          • HeilMary1

            Hate perfectly describes your ignorant toxic contempt for everyone slightly different from your psychotic pretensions of piety.

          • HeilMary1

            You’re an outright gay and woman hater yourself.

          • colleen2

            I’m amused that you can pretend that policy positions don’t express hatred and contempt.

          • fiona64

            Fucking around with a woman’s right to bodily autonomy is not something on which I’m willing to compromise. Hate to disappoint you …

          • HeilMary1

            Don’t you have a pedophile priest convention you should be attending?

          • HeilMary1

            What do you think of young “sinners” like Coy Mathis? Coy is one of triplets, the other two being sisters, but he being exposed to their estrogen during their gestation, identifies as female. Opposite sex twinning causes gay orientation throughout the animal kingdom, and only God/Goddess can be blamed for this. You are a flat-earth bigot to condemn people for being as they were made by nature.

  • Luis Tovar

    Senator Eddie Lucio, I feel violated by you joining Republicans on the attack on women’s rights.

  • kidcat24

    Closing abortion clinics doesn’t get rid of abortion. It just makes them unsafe. If you don’t know history, you’re doomed to repeat it.

  • fiona64

    What these woman-hating dimwits fail to understand is that there are numerous fetal anomalies that cannot even be detected until 20 weeks’ gestation or later. They would rather have women carry doomed pregnancies to term, and possibly die of complications, than stop practicing medicine without a license.

    • Jonathan Kuperberg

      “Practicing medicine without a license”… Whoops, you just used a term even more legally specific than “murder” has ever been, purposely outside of its legal context to make a moral point.
      Next time you come on Live Action trying to tell people they don’t know what “murder” means because they don’t hew to the state’s definition of it I’ll be pasting in this comment so they are aware of your hypocrisy.

      • fiona64

        When politicians are making laws that affect women’s medical decisions and physicians’ ability to practice, they are indeed practicing medicine without a license. I’m sorry that you are unable to comprehend that.

  • http://magicalgirlman.blogspot.com/ Matthew Abely

    I am a Californian, but I want to help this cause. What can I do?

    • Megumi Yuuki

      Make sure not to vote republican, and tell others to vote for real democrats, not these undercover republicans in Texas posing as democrats.

      • Jonathan Kuperberg

        “Pro-life= not a real Democrat”? What about Democrats for Life? And why were five pro-life Democrats on the stage in 1992 before Pat Buchanan lied and claimed there was “no room at the inn” for pro-life Casey in the culture war speech? (when it was endorsing Bush/Quayle that got him booted as per usual.) The truth actually works better as it shows that pro-lifers are “real” Democrats even in years where culture war is at the centre of the election.

        • AZDem9933

          If a Democrat gets weepy over embryos what they should do is support sex-ed, contraception access, health care for all, strong social safety net, etc. What that Dem should NOT do is join the Republicans in passing laws that criminalize women and doctors, redefine rape, allow women to die in the ER, and abstinence sex ed and defunding family planning. Yet “pro-life” Dems in Congress and state legislatures do just that, which makes them anti-choice misogynists just like their GOP counterparts.

          • Jonathan Kuperberg

            NARAL were using the term “Let Women Die Act” for the Protect Life Act- seems they went on false information. I do *not* ever support placing a fetus’ life above the pregnant woman’s and I do not know any pro-lifer who does. What’s the difference between “sex ed” and “abstinence sex ed”? Oh, I know- it’s the difference between the Responsible Sexual Values Program and the obnoxious ultra-liberal programs and materials my school used.
            Contraception and general health care access? Yes. And I found the wave of rape related comments and bills disgusting too even without a vagina or a uterus.

          • AZDem9933

            NARAL and other pro-choice groups were simply describing the bill accurately. It would have allowed providers to refuse to perform a life-saving abortion and even refuse to refer the woman to another hospital if it violated their religious or moral beliefs. It really doesn’t matter what you and other “pro-lifers” you know want or think will happen. There are cases of women being denied emergency abortions all over the world under abortion bans such as the recent case in Ireland where the woman died and Beatriz in El Salvador, who was finally granted a life-saving abortion after intense global pressure on the government there.

          • fiona64

            That’s because it’s exactly what it was, Jon. It put the value of a fetus ahead of the value of the born, sapient, sentient woman. I don’t remember the name of that Hindu lady who died in Ireland off the top of my head — but that’s exactly what the ridiculously named “Protect Life Act” would have done to every pregnant woman in crisis.

          • Jonathan Kuperberg

            Savita Halappanavar. R.I.P.
            I am very sorry she died. Given that the law in Ireland permits doctors to terminate pregnancies to save the woman’s life there was no need to blame it on legislation- it was a combination of medical malpractice and possible religious zealotry, but mainly the former.

            And I have already said I do not believe any pregnant woman should die for a fetus.

          • fiona64

            Thanks; I admit I was embarrassed that I could not recall her name. The Catholic hospital to which she was admitted would not terminate the pregnancy because they could still hear a fetal heartbeat … even as Savita died.

            I am grateful that you do not think women should have to die for a fetus. I don’t know whether you are aware of this, but there was a time not so long ago in US history when, if the choice had to be made between the woman and the fetus, the obstetrician would ask the *husband* which should be saved. Further back in history, the choice was always to save the fetus … on the grounds that the woman was already baptized and thus “saved,” but the fetus was not yet baptized into the church.

            And yes, there are plenty of anti-choice folk out there who maintain that the pregnant woman should be allowed to die for the fetus. It’s one of the most sickening, misogynistic things I’ve ever had the misfortune to personally witness.

          • HeilMary1

            I don’t believe Jon when he claims he makes abortion exceptions for dying women. He keeps moving the goal posts and lying about liberals, moderates, feminists and gays.

          • fiona64

            There are indeed times when I think he’s more full of shit than a French goose, but I have posted with him long enough to tell when he’s sincere.

            I don’t have to agree with him to get that .

          • Jonathan Kuperberg

            Thank you for standing up for me, I *don’t* support the “let women die” ideology and never have done.

          • colleen2

            I don’t believe anything he says.

          • Jonathan Kuperberg

            When are you talking about? I’d be interested to know because the history I read (though not so detailed) said that abortion was legal until quickening for the first 80-100 years of the nation’s founding and when it was made generally illegal, mainly on the protests of medical boards against midwives, hospitals had “therapeutic abortion boards” who could permit an exception for the life or health of the mother.

          • fiona64

            As recently as the 1950s in the case of men being asked whether to save the fetus or their wife. I have one older woman among my circle who had it happen to her, and she was dumbfounded (as was her husband) that the question would even be asked — let alone of some other party who would be alive regardless.

            “Life of the mother” exceptions (when granted) did not cover all of the issues. I’ve already related the story of my mother’s illegal abortion, undertaken at the advice of her obstetrician (who did not perform it but found her someone safe who would and did) after she contracted rubella during a crucial stage of fetal development. The medical establishment at the time would have demanded that my parents bring a blind, deaf, mentally disabled child into the world so that it (and the rest of the family) could have no quality of life whatsoever.

            The “save the child instead” thing from the church was still happening as recently as the 17th century in England. Yes, you have to reach further back, but it’s true.

            Generally speaking, you have the timeline correct. Abortion was made illegal in the 1880s in the US, with a push from doctors, and even discussing contraception was made a violation of the Comstock anti-pornography act. Nevertheless, women still sought to terminate pregnancies for the same variety of reasons we see nowadays.

          • HeilMary1

            Angus McLaren has written great books on the ancient history of contraception. He wrote that abortion potions were openly advertized in church bulletins before doctors had abortion criminalized here.

          • AZDem9933

            There are a lot of religious zealots in positions of authority. That is why you don’t pass laws giving them life and death power over women.

          • HeilMary1

            Except when such cases actually and frequently appear.

          • JamieHaman

            Not so Jon, the legislation did indeed allow for termination, provided no heart beat could be heard. The doctors claimed they could hear a heartbeat the entire time. Also, not so widely known is that in Ireland Doctors can be prosecuted for abortion, if the state so chooses. The Doctors made no bones about it, they would not lose their license to practice. if she died, but they could lose everything if they terminated the pregnancy.
            So, she died.
            That is understandable from a doctors’ point of view.
            It dammed well is not understandable from a woman’s point of view.

          • HeilMary1

            You oppose all truth and all moderate compromises and hope your “concessions” will trick us into thinking you’re moderate.

        • HeilMary1

          “Pro-lifers” are pro-DEAD mothers and morally unfit for the Democratic party.

        • colleen2

          Democrats for Life is irrelevant.

          • HeilMary1

            Also an oxymoron.

  • Renée Collins

    When does stupid, become evil?

    • JamieHaman

      When stupid refuses to learn, and acts on ignorance, that is when it becomes evil.

  • Rowdy Wilson

    Republican still the stupid party! Support Wendy Davis.
    Rep. Jodie Laubenberg too stupid to know what rape kits do.

  • Ann Peterson

    I keep hearing a woman’s choice, and women’s health and then a lot of political complaining. How about leaving all the political garbage at the curb and get down to the nitty-gritty, elephant in the middle of the room that so many people do not want to address and just talk around…What about that unborn child’s rights? When do they get a Choice as to whether or not they live or die? We women make our choice when we decide to have sex, and if your not mature/responsible enough to deal with the consequences don’t engage in it.

    • fiona64

      Translation: babies are punishment for sluts who can’t keep their legs closed.

      • Ann Peterson

        First of all a baby is n e v e r a punishment. I’m not saying anyone is a slut or anything else, just saying that we all need to take responsibility for our actions. I believe everyone should have the right and freedom to live their own life as they see fit, as long as you don’t harm anyone else living it. One person’s rights stop where the next person’s start, and that baby is a person. If you aren’t ready to be a parent fine, no prob, don’t risk getting pregnant or give the baby up for adoption. When you kill someone because their existence is inconvenient or an embarrassment or for any other reason but self defense it is Murder.

        • fiona64

          A fetus is not a person. The pregnant woman *is.* Why should she be enslaved to the contents of her uterus?

          Sometimes, “taking responsibility” means terminating a pregnancy. And the only person who has the right to make that decision for any given woman is that given woman herself. You don’t know anyone’s circumstances other than your own, be those circumstances financial, psychological, physical, etc. Other people’s medical decisions are none of your business.

          I love the “put it up for adoption” canard. That still involves a woman putting her life and health in jeopardy to gestate an unwanted pregnancy … and then assumes that there is someone to adopt said child.

          Why don’t you ask some of the hundreds of thousands of kids who age out of the system without ever having been adopted how well that works?

          • Ann Peterson

            A fetus, baby, unborn, etc. call them what you want a r e people, and they have the same right to life as we women do. They are not polyps or a cancer. We should be mature enough not to be ‘enslaved’ to our selfish natures of I WANT so it must be o.k. You’re right I don’t know everyone’s circumstances ,but I do know of many. I’m not relying on only my experience which you know nothing about, I have talked and read about thousands of women’s experiences. It all boils down to this really when is a person a person? I believe a person is a person at conception; therefore, just like any person killing them because of financial, psychological, physical, etc. reasons is murder.

          • fiona64

            “A person is a person at conception.”

            Really? We don’t know when conception takes place, only implantation — and even then it’s a guess based on things like last menstrual period and assumption that every woman’s cycle is identical.

            Many women flush products of conception out with their feminine hygiene products each month, as they did not implant and are discharged with menses. Are those women murderers? Are they flushing little people down the latrine?

            You are welcome to believe that, but you appear more than a trifle ridiculous as a result.

            Persons are born entities, madame. Amendment 14 to the US Constitution makes that very clear. I won’t even dignify your ridiculous assertion that a legal medical procedure is the equivalent of committing a felony.

            PS: Thanks for proving that my original assertion (that you believe babies should be punishment for those “sluts who don’t keep their legs closed”) with this statement: “We should be mature enough not to be ‘enslaved’ to our selfish natures of I WANT”

            How many unwanted children have you adopted, Ann? Just curious.

          • Ann Peterson

            How ridiculous…of course they are not ‘flushing little people down the latrine”! Menses is a natural process.
            Implantation of a fertilized egg that the body doesn’t reject is the start of every human alive whether it’s helped by a Dr. or is unaided.
            The 14th Amendment to The U.S. Constitution is about citizenship and was written mainly because of slavery. The court cases that redefine parts of it are still changing.
            We spend unknown millions of dollars a year trying to save children here in the U.S. and around the world. Including better education, food, health for pregnant women to help ensure better health and a chance for a better life for their children. I don’t know how the same people can turn around and so strongly argue to kill these same children just because a women decides she doesn’t want them. I’m a mom and know lots of other moms…sometimes it takes a G r e a t toll on you physically, mentally, financially and many other ways but we as a society know it’s wrong to kill our children for those reasons….why should it be any different when they are not yet born and are even more vulnerable?

          • AZDem9933

            Do you want women who abort their pregnancies to go to jail for murder, Ann?

          • Ann Peterson

            No I don’t, but I also don’t want them to kill their unborn children. It would be much better to make the choice of what to do about pregnancy before you are. Let me ask you this…what would happen to me if I went out to dinner and didn’t mean to but had a little too much to drink. I drank the same amount with dinner that I usually do, but it just hit me stronger for whatever reason. I then, not realizing I’m affected by the alcohol because that glass with dinner has never compromised me before, get into a car and accidently kill someone. I would go to jail, it would be horrible, I wouldn’t have meant any harm but I would have to take responsibility for my actions.

          • AZDem9933

            From that statement and the analogy to a drunk driver killing someone I am concluding that, yes, you do want women to go to jail. Appreciate your honesty. Anti-choice leaders swear up and down they have no desire to jail women and that it’s slanderous lie invented by pro-choicers. And yet, I encounter so many rank and file antis who are eager to put women who abort behind bars. I guess this is why women are already being prosecuted under 20 week abortion bans and so-called fetal protection laws.

          • fiona64

            So, in one breath you say you don’t want women to go to jail. In another post, you say you are not about punishing women (“paying the consequences”). And yet, in this post, you make it blatantly obvious that you equate “taking responsibility” with being punished.

            Perhaps it has never occurred to you, but women *do* make decisions before they get pregnant. For example, if my tubal ligation fails (and there is a possibility of failure, even with surgical contraception), I will have an abortion so fast that your head will spin. The reasons are none of your business, but the decision was made long ago, in discussion with my husband, who is in full agreement.

            You seem to be laboring under the impression that a) contraception never fails and b) based on your previous post, that rape victims should welcome a pregnancy that results from a crime against them. You are probably blissfully unaware that, in 31 states, rapists can sue for parental rights and visitation if their victim carries a pregnancy to term that results from that crime. But hey, who cares, right? After all, the woman “took responsibility” and surely there’s no problem with allowing the man who committed a crime against her to have access to her and a child, right?

          • Ann Peterson

            As a society we have decided that a person who commits murder goes to jail. As a person I decide if I’m going to follow the rules or not, and yes face the consequences. Not my decision.
            I did not say all women don’t plan ahead before they got pregnant just that you know it’s a possibility don’t act surprised if it happens.
            I think most people would say that it’s better to be prepared? You said that you discussed it with your husband and you have a plan,you thought ahead.
            And yes I am aware that contraceptions fail and tubals fail also (1:300) I also don’t think someone is going to welcome a pregnancy that results from a rape. I don’t think the baby should be punished either. I also am not only aware about the 31 states, rapists can sue for parental rights and visitation I have signed petitions against it and have and currently write my various state and federal reps. about it. It’s ridiculous that it happens at all and even more so that it’s been this hard to change.
            Have you ever ‘been there’? and had to make that decision? had to deal with that situation? Well, I have so yes I know what I’m talking about when I say take responsibility, and not hurting an innocent child after you have been hurt. Then dealing with all that comes after and after and …It’s hard but it would have been worse knowing that in a moment of pain, and anger I killed my own child.

          • fiona64

            Oh, now I get it. You “suffered the consequences” and want everyone to have to be in the same boat as you.

            Well, you got to make your choice to gestate. Another woman in the same circumstances doesn’t have to make the same choice.

          • Ann Peterson

            You sure like to put anyone down who doesn’t fall in step with you. I was attacked and decided not to attack my child. That is NOT suffering the consequences…I didn’t do anything wrong except walking while woman, and not being able to beat up someone bigger than myself. I am not trying to ‘make’ anyone ‘do’ anything I am ASKING women to consider another view. I am not the one verbally attacking (like your/snark) anyone else you are the only one in this exchange being petty. If you thought a group of people hat couldn’t defend themselves were being murdered on a regular basis wouldn’t you try to change it?

          • fiona64

            “Put down”? You mean, the way that you accuse any woman who’s had an abortion of committing a felony? Give me a break.

            You appear to take the view that women are too damned stupid to have thought about it. Why don’t you just come out and say that? What on *earth* makes you think that a woman who decides to terminate a pregnancy has not considered her options?

            Let me lay it out for you, as simply as possible.

            Once you’re pregnant, there are only two options: gestation or termination. Really, you seem to take the view that no woman is aware that this is the case.

            Once you decide to gestate, there are only two more options: rear any resulting child (even wanted pregnancies go wrong) or place any resulting child for adoption.

            Once you decide to terminate, those additional two options are moot.

            Any woman may apply any value she so desires to this “flow chart” (for lack of a better way to put it). No two women have to decide the same way — as it should be.

            I am also a survivor of sexual assault; had I gotten pregnant, there would indeed have been an abortion. I would have chosen differently from you — and neither one of us is wrong, no matter what you think.

          • Ella Warnock

            I have considered the other view and found it wanting. Believe me, I never would have worked so hard to get my ducks in a row if I had found anything even remotely palatable about the “other view.” It was simply unacceptable.

          • HeilMary1

            Death or gross disfigurement caused by dangerous pregnancies are worse than any abortions.

          • Ella Warnock

            But in Fiona’s case, she’s done her due diligence. Sterilization (excellent choice) is about as serious as you can get that babies are not welcome. She has taken responsibility, and plans to do so in the event of a catastrophic failure. She’s clearly given it a lot of thought and has planned in accordance with what is best for her and her husband. I’m going to assume that she also has the resources to pay for an abortion and to travel, if necessary, if access is made more difficult in her area.

            Those are exactly the types of situations that pro-lifers won’t ever have too much of an impact on, as women with resources always have been able to get what they’re looking for. No reason to think that’s going to change in the future.

          • fiona64

            Exactly. And that is why, specifically because I *do* know that I have those resources, i continue to fight on behalf of women who might not.

          • Jennifer Starr

            You made your decision. You made a choice. Not everyone is going to make the same choice. You be happy with your choice and let other women freely make theirs.

          • Ann Peterson

            I’m not keeping anyone from making a choice, I am trying to show that there are other choices besides abortion. I personally don’t think that this is something we as a nation can legislate. It’s a tough subject, that brings out strong emotions all the way round. The hardliners on ‘both’ sides make open discourse hard for everyone in the middle. Which I think a lot of us are.

          • fiona64

            Please, do not make me draw out the flow chart again. If one is pregnant, there are only two choices: gestation or termination. Any other choices are determined by what the pregnant woman decides at the point of that first choice. Do you really believe that women are unaware of this? Really?

          • HeilMary1

            I’d love to see fetal idolators jailed whenever their interference results in maternal childbirth deaths and injuries.

          • Amanda Kazarian

            Noble thoughts, but those babies cost money. It blows my mind that I have to keep bringing up the fact that while you can strap a woman to a bed for nine months and force her to give birth, you can’t force her to parent. I hope you don’t mind tax increases, because someone will have to pay for those babies to eat.

          • goatini

            Au contraire, my dear – if you falsely insist that a single-cell fertilized egg is a (ahem) “person”, then the fertilized eggs that fail to implant in the uterine lining ARE most definitely, in your worldview “little people” that DO get “flush(ed)… down the latrine”. I look forward to your lurid descriptions of the funeral services you conduct monthly over your commode. Surely you DO conduct funeral services for all the putative “little people” that have been dispatched due to your failure to gestate each and every one of them, don’t you? I await your description of the tragic ceremony and the liturgy you use to properly lay all those “little people” to a proper eternal rest in your municipality’s sewage system. After all, you wouldn’t be a big old hypocrite, would you?

          • Ann Peterson

            You missed the part where I wrote the fertilized egg has to implant itself…otherwise its not viable…sooooo no monthly funeral service needed. And ‘little people’ was someone else’s description I was just responding their question. Just as an aside question…how would not having funeral services for well, any one be hypocritical?

          • goatini

            Oh, but my dear hypocrite, the single-celled organism that attaches is exactly the same as the single-celled organism that gets dispatched down the commode.

            Forced-birthers are nothing, if not always completely inconsistent in their specious ideology.

          • Ann Peterson

            Another vocab lesson> Hypocrite: a person who indulges in hypocrisy. Hypocrisy: a person who professes beliefs in and opinions that he does not actually hold or believe. */ I believe everything I’m writing here and hold it to be true to the best of my knowledge.
            As soon as the sperm actually gets into the egg itself (past a few layers) it immediately begins to divide. (Morula) So multiple celled, and no not the same thing is viable IF it attaches.

          • fiona64

            Actually, not all zygotes are viable just because they implant. That’s why there are things called miscarriages.

          • fiona64

            You, madame, were the one who said “a person is a person from the moment of conception.” I merely took your statement and ran with it …

          • Ann Peterson

            Madame, thank You Fiona, tired of being called a man. I said conception is when the fertilized egg implants itself to the uterine wall.

          • fiona64

            Your initial statement was “A person is a person from conception.” And implantation =/= conception; the former happens only *after* the latter, and then only part of the time.

            I could have sworn you said that you read medical journals … perhaps a high school biology text would be more appropriate.

          • Ella Warnock

            So you’re saying that pregnancy begins at implantation, not conception. Conception occurs beforehand and it can take a blastocyst up to 4 days (implantation window) to travel down the fallopian tubes into the uterus to finally implant. Are you saying that a 1-4 day-old blastocyst is fair game until and unless in implants? There are an awful lot of “ifs” during that period of time.

          • HeilMary1

            And just try getting priests to give those bloody tampons last rites! They became priests to escape women’s personal health issues.

          • AZDem9933

            “How ridiculous…of course they are not ‘flushing little people down the latrine”!”

            If you think it’s a person from conception then, yes, that’s what it would be.

          • fiona64

            Those children who are in need of better education, food, etc.? Are born. They are not fetuses. They are born, sapient, sentient individuals. Their mothers “took responsibility,” as you put it … and now the kids are living in hunger and poverty. Yep, that’s a great idea, isn’t it?

            Perhaps you’ve never talked to anyone who grew up in a violent, abusive household, or in a state of constant hunger, and heard them say how they wish they’d never been born. I *have.* It’s not a pretty thing that some people live through, because their mother “took responsibility” the way that you demand they should. Or do you have some fantasy that children are unaware when they’re not wanted?

          • Ann Peterson

            You have no idea what I went through growing up. It taught me many things…including it doesn’t matter what any one else does or doesn’t do, do what you know it right. Also, it’s wrong to hurt others just because you have been hurt.

          • fiona64

            And guess what? You still don’t get to decide what’s “right” for anyone other than yourself. Whether you like it or not, for some other woman, the “right” and “responsible” thing to do could very well be to terminate a pregnancy.

            No one is going to force you to terminate a pregnancy; why do you think you have the right to force the opposite decision on some woman you don’t even know?

            Lady, I can tell you one thing: I lack your hubris, because I wouldn’t have the guts to even *think* such a thing, let alone say it.

          • HeilMary1

            If you believed your own crap, you’d be banning abortifacient coffee, tea, cola, holy wine and hundreds of other “baby flushing” products. You’d be attending “baby” tampon funerals every month.

          • Ella Warnock

            If a conception occurred and the blastocyst didn’t implant for whatever reason, then yes, a little “person” sloughs off with the menstrual period and is disposed of, the woman never the wiser. How often this happens naturally remains a subject of debate.

          • Ann Peterson

            How is being a mature person capable of discerning between wants, and needs…deciding what is good for yourself and what is not, choosing what you’re ready to deal with in all areas of your life not just with physical gratification equal to saying “sluts who don’t keep their legs closed” ? You keep bringing this up?? I don’t want to regulate any one’s sexual schedule but my own, I’m just asking women to think about making a reproduction decision before they have sex. Yes, it is selfish and immature not to. When a child wants something they want it Now! no thought to the consequences. They don’t want to hear anything from anyone even if what they want will hurt someone else. We as adults step in and teach them the difference between wants and needs and how to curb their desires to their benefit not their detriment. Sometimes we as adults forget that ourselves. This isn’t about judging each others sex lives it’s about not killing our children before they are born.
            No, I haven’t adopted any children…I have two children which is all I can financially and responsibly take care of. Neither of my children were ‘planned’ but they are the love of my life. Not to say it’s out of the question to adopt in the future. I do personally know several people who have adopted children of all ages. Now, before you start pointing fingers saying well you haven’t adopted etc. I have taken care of those that I have given birth to and helped other children find adoptive parents. The issue isn’t about adoption either it’s about not killing our unborn children.

          • fiona64

            No, the issue is you wanting to regulate other women’s sex lives … and not understanding basic human development. If it isn’t born, it’s not a child.

          • Ann Peterson

            For the last time this is NOT about having sex or not having sex I’m not the sex police. It is about not killing babies. We will have to just disagree…you keep saying if ‘it’ isn’t born it’s not a child. I felt my children growing inside of me. I can’t even explain the feeling, the knowing…but they were babies, humans, people before they were born.

          • fiona64

            If you know of anyone who has killed a baby, call the police! Infanticide is a crime!

            You can refer to a fetus as a baby all you want; it just makes you look a trifle … over-romantic. I can sit in the garage, but that doesn’t mean I’m a Buick.

          • Amanda Kazarian

            You just want to regulate that all women be at the mercy of their biology.

          • Ann Peterson

            Nope not at all. I just think that the bill should have passed so that if someone is having this procedure it will be safe. Right now there are many woman having to deal with health issues afterwards that they shouldn’t. They also need after care that isn’t being provided there needs to be physical follow up care similar to when a woman has a miscarriage…the body reacts in a similar way. Also the farther along in a pregnancy a woman is the more dangerous it is to her for the abortion. After 5-6 months it greatly increases the risk to the woman, and the baby has a developed nervous system so the procedure is torturous to him/her. And no those clinics do not have to shut down…they have 6 months to up their standards and can apply for help to do this as well as apply for extensions. For the last time, I am not telling any one else what to do…I simply gave my opinion and listened to others…without getting up on a high horse and try to tell every one else ‘what they really meant’

          • HeilMary1

            The problem is that you’re OK with fetuses killing mothers.

          • goatini

            There is no such thing as an, ahem, “unborn child”. Are you an “undead corpse”?

          • HeilMary1

            Then please arrest yourself for your own self-induced coffee abortions.

        • AZDem9933

          You might as well just say you think we’re sluts. Throwing around code words like “consequences” already makes that clear.

          • Ann Peterson

            So tired of this word. Definition of slut: a slovenly, unkept, or unclean person. A sexually promiscuous person. usu. female. I haven’t called or even intimated that anyone was one. As far as I know you can have sex once and get pregnant, and I don’t think a woman having sex with her husband frequently would meet that definition either. It’s not about having or not having sex. It’s about taking responsibility for the results. If i decide to drink I have to take responsibility for my actions afterwards. If I am a mechanic and repair someones brakes etc. I have to take responsibility for my work. If I stand up in a crowded movie theatre and shout, “FIRE!” and someone get’s hurt or killed then I have to take responsibility for my actions. Well, simply put having sex can have other results besides the pleasure at the time. Such as an unplanned pregnancy. No one forced anyone to get pregnant, but a child is not an s.t.d. to just get rid of.

          • AZDem9933

            You think sex is something that should have “consequences” for unmarried women. That is the definition of slut-shaming.

          • Ann Peterson

            What? Sex haasss consequences for Any one who has it. Everything we do has consequences. I think that your attitude is part of what is wrong with our society. So many people think that they are exempt from cause and effect. Hello, if I do this this can happen sooo I make a choice do this and deal with whatever good/bad happens or don’t do this and not have to deal with results and don’t get to do whatever I wanted to do. It’s not opinion it is cause and effect, simple scientific fact.

          • fiona64

            The simple, scientific fact is that a) all forms of contraception have known failure rates and b) no woman should be forced to remain pregnant against her will. That is nothing short of slavery.

            In the highly unlikely event that Roe v. Wade is overturned, do you really think that abortion will go away? It won’t. Abortion was legal in this country for a lot longer than it was illegal … and even when it was illegal, women still terminated pregnancies.

            My mother was one of those women. She contracted rubella during a crucial phase of fetal development. With my father and her OB/GYN, she made a decision to terminate the pregnancy rather than bring a deaf, blind, mentally disabled infant into the world to live a life of silent, dark uncomprehending misery. So, I guess that, in your eyes, my mother is a felon because she would rather terminate a pregnancy than bring a child into the world so that would have zero quality of life.

            If you would have been able to handle that, bully for you. Not every woman could, nor should she be forced to do so.

          • Ella Warnock

            Dependable and widely accessible contraception has been the engine driving that train. We HAVE been able to remove a great deal of the risk of pregnancy. Some of your fellow travelers believe that it’s actually contraception that’s at the root of this issue. Giving women access to birth control also gave them more access to abortion, especially in the event that BC failed. Many feel that access to BC should be limited so that, I suppose, women will start to grow more accustomed to the idea that they’re just going to have children no matter what. Or something. It sounds really horrifying because I can imagine that in that kind of culture it would be virtually IMPOSSIBLE for women to voluntarily sterilize at all. Women who want and have children DO like the freedom to plan and space their families, so that’s a very dangerous slippery slope.

            So, we’ve ended up at a point where we CAN avoid some consequences of some actions. That’s not necessarily a step backward. Yes, choice has meant that IF I had an unwanted pregnancy — despite going to Herculean lengths to avoid — I can make the choice to deal with that consequence through abortion.

            I don’t KNOW what any other woman should do in a similar situation. I would never presume to TELL her she should do anything in particular. My only advice would be that she unflinchingly search her heart and mind and make that decision for HERSELF. If she decides to adopt out, then I support that because she made that choice as a free agent. I support her if she wants to raise a kid. I just assume that any woman is as capable as I am of making decisions that will serve her well, and that INCLUDES raising a child when common sense might suggest it’s not an optimal situation. That doesn’t matter; if it’s what she searched her heart and decided, then it was the right choice.

          • HeilMary1

            No abortion = $1 million + in hospital bills, disability unemployment, spousal abuse, divorce, pedophile priests molesting the neglected children of dumped, disfigured mothers, massive adult unemployment caused by child slave labor, ruinous global poverty and resource wars.

        • goatini

          Being forced under duress into gestational slavery to bring an unwanted pregnancy to term is INDEED a punishment, and you’re just playing word games to defend the indefensible.

          • Ann Peterson

            Gestational Slavery!? Really!? now Who is playing word games? Don’t want a hangover don’t over drink, don’t want to get fat watch what you eat…but as we all know that sometimes even if we don’t drink a lot the same amount of alcohol can effect us differently at times, and even if you watch what you eat you can still gain/ not lose weight depending on other factors…If you have sex even when you take precautions you run the risk of becoming pregnant, that’s when you make the choice, knowing full well what could possibly happen. It’s a simple physical act and effect, not punishment imposed on any one or ‘handed down from on high’ If you do this these are the possible results…then you choose. So if you make the choice to have sex, mazel tov, just don’t punish an innocent because of convenience.

          • goatini

            Fetuses are not and cannot be “innocent”, by definition. Innocence requires sentience.

            And I, as a female US citizen, am entitled to the SAME 14th Amendment protections that every MALE US citizen is endowed with at birth.

            You really are a vicious, deliberately ignorant excuse for a human being, and I’m pretty sure that you’re a MAN. Forced-birther men love to troll with female personas to attempt to garner some pathetic shred of credibility.

          • Ann Peterson

            Innocent: adj: Not guilty of a crime of offense. noun: an innocent person, in particular. syn: guiltless, harmless, naive. * /So yes fetuses are innocent.
            Sentience: awareness; state of elementary consciousness. i.e. self aware.*/by your definition of innocence a one month old isn’t even innocent.
            Vicious: adj: Deliberately cruel or violent. */ I have done nothing cruel deliberate or other wise and have not been violent by any means.
            You really need to read the 14th Amendment for yourself because you do have the same rights protections that every male and female US citizen is endowed with at birth…along with the same responsibilities.
            And I’m a little tired of being called a man. Unlike your goatini persona I put my actual name on my posts.

          • fiona64

            Something that has no conscious cannot have a conscience … and thus a fetus can be neither innocent nor guilty. You are basically projecting when you claim a fetus is “innocent.” If the woman dies of pregnancy complications (you know, in the process of “taking responsibility”), do we say the fetus is “guilty”? No? Well, there you are then.

          • goatini

            To be “guiltless”, then the capacity to be guilty MUST be present. Therefore, a fetus CANNOT, by definition, be “innocent”.

            Advocating for stripping female US citizens of their civil. human and Constitutional rights IS deliberately cruel.

            The 14th Amendment right to privacy, under the due process clause, protect the civil rights of female US citizens to privacy and personal bodily autonomy.

            And it’s a well-known fact that forced-birther males troll with female personas.

          • fiona64

            And it’s a well-known fact that forced-birther males troll with female personas.

            Yep, that’s no secret. I don’ think she’s male, to be honest. I do think she’s a forced-birther, though. Her constant statements about how pregnant women should “think about the other option” … as though no pregnant woman considers her options … proves that.

          • fiona64

            .If you have sex even when you take precautions you run the risk of
            becoming pregnant, that’s when you make the choice, knowing full well
            what could possibly happen.

            Yep, and sometimes “what could possibly happen” is terminating an unwanted pregnancy. Only the pregnant woman herself gets to decide that.

          • HeilMary1

            So smokers should be denied cancer treatments as punishment for still smoking? Drunk drivers should be left to die in car crashes? Sexually active women deserve lady part shredding by fetuses so priests will have unlimited fresh altar boys?

          • Amanda Kazarian

            So women that don’t want children should never have sex? Ok if you say so, I’ll let my husband know.

        • HeilMary1

          ALL abortions are medical self-defense.

    • JamieHaman

      As long as you value the unborn more than the women who bear them there is a problem. Women don’t always get to make the choice of sex, that is called rape.

      You say nothing about the irresponsible men who father children, then refuse to provide insurance, or child support, or anything else.

      Until you castigate those fathers, you should say nothing about those women who refuse to lose their homes because of unpaid maternity leave, and no guarantee of the same job when they return.

      • fiona64

        Of course she doesn’t! She just wants to make sure those sluts “take responsibility” by forcing them to have children. Don’t you know that those sluts are impregnated in a vacuum? /snark

        • Ann Peterson

          Just because you have sex doesn’t mean you are a slut. So far you are the only one here judging.

          I’m not forcing any one to have children…just asking Women to take responsibility for their actions and bodies B e f o r e they get pregnant.

          And Yep, it should go without saying but I guess you want it all spelled out We [women] are not impregnated in a vacuum there has to be a guy, buuuuutttt unless we are raped we decided to have sex with the guy. Sooooo if we are mature enough to have sex then we as women need to be mature enough to take responsibility for having sex and all of it’s results whether they be yeast infections, s.t.d.s, psychological complications, or creating another human. So maybe instead of killing an innocent human we could…oh say…use our Choices to pick a decent partner, weigh whether or not it’s worth having sex with the horrible jerks you keep bringing up vs. dealing with the list of possible consequences oooor wait until we had grown up and were unselfish enough to put someone else’s well being above our own.

          • Jonathan Kuperberg

            I don’t get why liberals feel the urge to bring the word “slut” into so many conversations about women when no-one else has.

          • goatini

            The word and its pejorative nature is implied in all forced-birther talking points.

          • Jonathan Kuperberg

            No, it is not implied. People have different reasons for their views on abortion and I know my own heart. If it’s only about “shaming sluts” then why would not one current or proposed antiabortion law have an exception for married women? No pro-choicer has ever answered this.

          • AZDem9933

            It’s a dumb question. Married women aren’t exempt from anti-choice laws just like white people aren’t exempt from drug laws, yet those laws vastly disproportionally target minorities. Similarly, under the abortion laws you want the kind of women who will be prosecuted for abortion will be poor, minority, and otherwise marginalized women. The nice ladies from the suburbs will still be able to get their procedures and be left alone.

          • Ann Peterson

            Nope, same law for everyone.

          • goatini

            Like I just said, vicious, deliberately ignorant, and even more sure now that you’re a MAN.

          • Ann Peterson

            How is that vicious? What knowledge are you saying I’m lacking in? (that is what ignorant means) and I am most definitely a women, was single for awhile…I am married and have two kids, and have been through enough in my life to know what I’m talking about as far as choices good and bad, dealing with the consequences of them and learning to try to keep thing simple and to the point. Also that people usually feel threatened and scared by what they don’t understand which is where hate usually comes in. I don’t hate unmarried, sexually active women…I am just asking that they don’t hate or be hatefully towards their unborn children.

          • fiona64

            And, of course, no *married* woman could possibly need abortion services, right? Per the Guttmacher Institute, the majority of abortions are performed on married women in their late 20s to early 30s. While women are not required to disclose the reasons for termination, most of them are because their birth control failed, they do not want or cannot afford any more children.

            But you don’t give a damn about any of that, do you? As long as you can force the woman to “take responsibility,” who cares whether her remaining kids are impoverished, etc.

          • Ann Peterson

            I don’t think you have read the above posts…the laws need to be for all women married and unmarried alike. I cannot ‘force’ any one to do anything all I’m asking is for women/people to examine their choices. But yes, we ALL need to be responsible for our choices. I do give a damn about taking care of the children we have. I love children I work with them everyday. I also would have loved to have had more children but I knew that I didn’t have enough resources financially, time, etc. to take care of more than the two I had soooo I stopped having them. I chose a way that did not kill any unborn children and I certainly didn’t stop having sex with my husband.

          • fiona64

            What makes you think women don’t “examine their choices” before they decide to terminate a pregnancy? Do you think it’s treated as something equivalent to picking out a nail lacquer color at the salon? How completely absurd.

            Oh, wait. You mean “examine their choices … and come to the conclusion that Ann Peterson says they should.” Sorry, my bad. I thought you meant for women to actually, you know, understand their own personal circumstances and decide for themselves.

            That’s pretty much the definition of a forced-birther, you know … someone who thinks that “taking responsibility” equals “gestating the pregnancy, regardless of circumstances.”

          • AZDem9933

            Yet you will happily put women in jail for abortion, leaving at least some children motherless while their Mom does time for “murder”.

          • HeilMary1

            But your pedophile priests want to ban sterilization and contraception as well. Look how they ruined Manila over the past ten years.

          • Ella Warnock

            Look, you and I, at least, are coming at this from completely different perspectives. It’s clear you really have a love for children and are very happy you had yours. I do think that women who really enjoy motherhood think that if a woman would “just have the baby,” that they would feel as you do. Some will, some won’t, but it certainly isn’t a given.

            As a lifelong childfree woman, I can tell you that nothing interested me less, literally nothing. I was sterilized as quickly as I could be after I married, but that still left six long years of hormonal birth control. Luckily for me, it was very dependable and there were no accidents. But I should never have had to WAIT that long to exercise my bodily autonomy and make my own CHOICE to put the baby-making apparatus out of business. I’m certain I would not have been a good mother and that I wouldn’t have enjoyed it very much. Oh, I could keep a kid alive, but that’s not quite the same thing, is it?

          • Jennifer Starr

            Well do you know that to many ‘pro-lifers’ you would be in the wrong–that they believe that unless every sex act is ‘open to life’? (aka unprotected), you’re committing a sin and shouldn’t be having sex at all? Believe me–we’ve had them here on this board.

          • Ann Peterson

            That’s their right to think that. As I’ve said from the beginning I’m not trying to force anyone to think like I do, I’m not part of a ‘group’, I’m not a man pretending to be a woman, I lean to the conservative side on some things but I don’t ‘side’ with either of our main political groups because I feel that they are both have been corrupted. I was trying to share a point of view and take in some other views to think about. As humans I believe we grow and learn all the time or stagnate.

          • goatini

            We ARE being threatened by those who threaten to strip us of our civil, human and Constitutional rights to the guarantees of the protections of the 14th Amendment.

            And married women also obtain safe, legal pregnancy terminations, so thanks for evidencing more of your covert slut-shaming in your comment.

          • HeilMary1

            So they should let themselves be murdered by untreated cancers caused by gestating female fetuses?

          • Ella Warnock

            Do you think that anyone here might also know what she’s talking about due to her own life experiences and dealing with the choices she’s made? She has just come to some wildly different conclusions about life than you have. I don’t think there’s a point at which our interests and priorities converge, frankly.

            And then there is always, always, the law of unintended consequences. A government that can greatly limit access to abortion might at some point have the same power to force abortion. A government with that kind of power could also decide to, oh, limit access to birth control as well.

            And you can’t be unaware that there’s a growing number of pro-lifers who are also coming out very strongly against contraception. This is a problem, and it’s going to set your cause back in a dramatic way if you allow that particular drum beat to get any louder.

          • fiona64

            Oh, yes it bloody well is. What else is all that “take responsibility” and “pay the consequences” nonsense but “you sluts should keep your legs closed”?

          • Ann Peterson

            No one said ‘pay’ the consequences…there is a difference. There are positive and negative consequences/results/effects to everything we do. I would think that you would want us all to be responsible adults and own what we do?

          • fiona64

            Certainly. And, as I already pointed out, sometimes the most responsible thing to do is to terminate a pregnancy — and only the pregnant woman can make that call. Not you, me, some legislator practicing medicine without a license, or anyone else.

          • Ann Peterson

            I guess that is where we differ…I don’t see that as being personally responsible. I see terminating a pregnancy as something more than getting rid of something that you don’t want in your body. It’s placing the responsibility on the baby who had the least say in the matter. I also don’t rely on some legislator to practice unlicensed medicine. I’ve spoken to doctors that have done abortions and read what many other doctors have written about it. That was what really convinced me about when a baby is a baby.

          • fiona64

            Well, as they used to say on the playground, “tough titty for you.” You may not see it as responsible, but it’s not up to you to decide. Please, gestate every unwanted/unplanned pregnancy you so desire … no one will condemn you for it. You just don’t get to make that decision for anyone else.

          • HeilMary1

            Google obstetric fistulas and molar pregnancies.

          • Ella Warnock

            Babies never have any say in any matter. That’s unfortunate, but it is and always has been one of life’s harsher realities. Responsibility is, apparently, in the eye of the beholder.

          • HeilMary1

            No woman deserves death or disfigurement as a consequence of any kind of sex.

          • Ella Warnock

            To be fair, I rarely hear a pro-lifer speaking of “consequences” (meaning children, of course) in a positive light. There’s an unspoken undercurrent in the language that gives the impression that having a child is something less than desirable but a “duty” nonetheless.

          • HeilMary1

            You know the Catholic Church most especially believes married women are the biggest sluts around. Google the Jansenist heretics who’ve been running the Vatican for centuries. They banned marital sex most days and weeks of the year and proclaimed sex on Sundays as the cause of all birth defects.

          • Ann Peterson

            For the same reason anyone uses it. To turn the attention away from the point/topic at hand by trying to torque up peoples outrage, and emotions. Just like other words such as ‘forced-birther’.

          • Jonathan Kuperberg

            Well yes… “Anti-abortion” would be better than “anti-reproductive freedom woman hating theocratic forced birther slut-shamer misogynistic bigot” but it isn’t emotive enough for the extremists.

            I must admit I’m not the best person to speak though having used a lot of extreme, bomb-throwing, vitriolic rhetoric on the other side of social issues to them.

          • AZDem9933

            Well, because “anti-abortion” doesn’t cover the full range of the bigoted, hateful, misogynistic, slut shaming, prudish, authoritarian views of anti-choicers.

          • Jonathan Kuperberg

            I’m certainly not “prudish” let alone a hateful bigot…

          • AZDem9933

            We’ll just have to agree to disagree on that.

          • HeilMary1

            You are the epitome of a hateful prude! Are you just angry that you don’t have the looks to attract your dream girl?

          • colleen2

            you’re pretty hateful….

          • AZDem9933

            I think it must be exhausting to try and hide your true feelings behind code words and smokescreens. It’s obvious to everyone what you think of unmarried sexually active women so why not just own it?

          • Ann Peterson

            Wish I could meet you, I’m just not into hating people because that would be exhausting. I actually have a great love of my fellow humans which is why I object to killing them before they are born. I do not tell any one how to live their life married/ unmarried, sexually active/ sexually not active, that is their business. I also am not using ‘code words’ just words as they are defined in Webster to try to plainly convey an idea and a question of why kill children before they are born?

          • fiona64

            If it isn’t born, it isn’t a child. I’m sorry that Webster didn’t help you understand that.

          • Ann Peterson

            No reading medical journals, and articles written by doctors who have performed abortions and who have researched fetal development have to say. A person starts to form when the fertilized egg successfully attaches to the uterine wall.

          • fiona64

            No, actually, a *zygote* starts to form when the fertilized egg successfully attaches to the uterine wall. Persons are born entities.

          • HeilMary1

            You know coffee, tea and holy wine flush out zygotes!

          • goatini

            You have a deep seated hatred of autonomous female US citizens protecting their civil, human and Constitutional rights. Your passive-aggressive commentary has proven this most amply.

          • goatini

            Aren’t you proud of being a forced-birther? More hypocrisy from you, I see.

          • Ann Peterson

            Last time I checked I haven’t raped any one and or tied down any pregnant women and forced them to give birth. So I don’t see how I’m being a hypocrite for saying I believe it’s wrong to kill babies?

          • fiona64

            You really don’t see that forcing women to gestate pregnancies (wanted or not, doomed or not) is ::gasp:: being a forced-birther?

          • HeilMary1

            You use it, then pretend otherwise, Mr. Name Caller.

          • fiona64

            You do know that a l l (what the hell is that spacing about? Don’t you know how to use HTML tags for emphasis) methods of contraception, including surgical sterilization, have known failure rates?

            What a bunch of simplistic nonsense you post.

          • Ann Peterson

            The spacing is for emphasis you are wanting women to have the Choice to end their child’s life and you’re busting my chops about how I choose to emphasis a typed statement? Yes, of course I know that all methods of contraception and sterilization have know failure rates. Everything we do is a choice, and has negative and positive results…but I feel that we are at an impasse…we differ on the basic definition of who is human and who is not. You have the right and freedom to believe as you like, but I also have this right and freedom to believe as I do. It seems that you and some of the more recent ‘posters’ here feel the need to personally attack any one who disagrees with you instead of talking about the issues. Until both sides of this situation are ready to stop attacking and just explain and discuss where they are coming from and why they think the way they do we aren’t going to get anywhere.

          • fiona64

            There’s nothing to “explain or discuss.” I think that women are smart enough to know their own circumstances and whether they are able to gestate a given pregnancy or not. You don’t.

            And yes, we do differ on the definition of who is a person/human. I happen to think it’s the born, sapient, sentient woman. You do not.

            BTW, you can use HTML for emphasis. You can make bold type by using [b] phrase [/b], for instance … except you use the instead of the brackets. The spacing is not emphatic; it’s headache-inducing.

            Glad to be of help.

          • goatini

            More passive-aggressive slut-shaming – people posting to defend the civil, human and Constitutional rights of female US citizens to the guarantees of the protections of the 14th Amendment, are referred to snarkily by you as, ahem, ‘posters’ in gratuitous quotes. You’re a piece of work, with your obtuse deliberate ignorance, calling the defense of the civil rights of American citizens “personal attacks” – since it is the forced-birthers who ARE attacking the civil rights of free female US citizens.

          • HeilMary1

            Guess you never heard of virgin grooms turning into gay scam artists or repulsed husbands getting annulments over stinky childbirth incontinence. “Grown up” is no guarantee that the men will stick around.

        • AZDem9933

          Notice how she doesn’t even address goatini’s points about the economic difficulties pregnant women face. She just goes on about “responsibility”. Apparently poverty for the mother and child is a just reward for ‘irresponsibility”.

          • fiona64

            It’s painfully obvious that she only cares about the fetus and not about the actual child.

          • Ann Peterson

            That fetus is an actual child.

          • fiona64

            No, it’s a fetus. We have names for differing stages of development for a reason. For someone who claims to read “medical journals,” you haven’t gotten much information out of them. The developmental stages are: conception, zygote (first through third day of gestation), blastocyst (through second week of gestation), embryo (third through eighth week of gestation), fetus (9th week until birth), infant (birth until one year), child (one to 12 years of age). The latter two require ::wait for it:: birth. (See? Emphasized, with nary a space in sight.)

          • HeilMary1

            Fetuses grossly maim and murder millions of women worldwide. You need obstetric incontinence to get a clue to cure your lethal ignorance.

          • Ann Peterson

            I am intimately aware of the economic difficulties pregnant women face. Been there done that. I don’t have a high paying job or anything resembling a trust fund. I’m not saying it’s not hard. It’s just not a good enough reason to murder my child.

          • fiona64

            Murder is the unlawful (illegal) taking of a person’s life with malice aforethought. Your constant harping that a legal medical procedure is the same as a felony is really kind of laughable on several levels — not the least of which is that a) a fetus is not a person and b) abortion is legal.

            And before you even bring up the fetal homicide laws, please be advised that they can only attach as special circumstances when there is a violent crime against an actual *person* — the pregnant woman.

            You really are making it more and more apparent that you figure that, since you suffered and had unplanned kids (your own admission …), everyone else should have to do the same. You made your choice, and you don’t want anyone else to have the right to make *theirs.* And yes, having children *is* a choice.

          • Ann Peterson

            Sorry to give you that impression. I didn’t suffer by having my kids unplanned. Were things hard at times yes. They both came at unexpected times. I am so blessed to have them. I also don’t think that every one should feel like they HAVE to have a kid. There isn’t anything wrong with not having kids. Like anything else in life somethings are just, well not your thing.
            As stated before I came here to hear other peoples views and to share mine for someone else to think about, I believe it helps us grow as people. I really didn’t expect the level of aggression in a lot of the posts….I would like to hear your viewpoints without the personal attacks. Part of what shaped my views on abortion come from the Bible(yep heard the comments before) ,a close friend of mine having an abortion then almost killing herself years later because of it…even with counseling and support that might surprise you reinforced that God loves her, and that she is a wonderful person who made a hard choice. Also, I work with special needs children every day and have heard people making horrible comments like that kid should have been aborted when they are so joyful and have a productive life. I know that there are so many children out there who deserve and need so much more than they have.
            I also do not value the baby over the mom…and yes there are times when tough decisions have to be made in the delivery room to save the mom, but I also value that yes, unborn baby who shouldn’t have to die because they are an inconvenience.

          • Dez

            Your religious beliefs and beliefs about fetuses are irrelevant to my right to an abortion.

          • fiona64

            If there is one word that gets up my nose in these discussions more than any other, it is “inconvenience.” You are trivializing a decision that has been made, simply because you don’t know the reasons behind it and assume that the woman just said something like “Hmm. What do I need to do today? Go to the grocery, buy a new pair of shoes and, oh, hey! I’d better run over and get an abortion.”

            Please, grant me that you think women are smarter than that.

            What would you have said to the woman in my mother’s position (I have already written about her illegal abortion)? Because a blind, deaf, mentally disabled infant — who would grow up to be a blind, deaf, mentally disabled adult whose care would have probably bankrupted our family? That’s a tragedy right there: bringing a child into the world so that neither said child nor its family can have any quality of life.

            What would you say to the woman who has escaped domestic violence only to discover her pregnancy, and whose abuser tells her that no, he would *not* terminate parental rights so she could place any resulting child for adoption, and would sue for joint custody and visitation?

            What would you say to the breast cancer patient who finds she is pregnant and has to choose between chemotherapy to save her life and continuing a pregnancy?

            Three examples, just from my own circle. These are not matters of mere “convenience,” and that you would discuss them as such trivializes lives of real people. I want you to really think about that.

            The only women who regret abortions are women who didn’t want them. C. Everett Koop was tasked by Ronald Reagan to find evidence of so-called “post-abortion syndrome” and failed. I am sorry that your friend regretted her decision, for whatever reason, but she still had the right to make that decision. That she regrets it is NOT cause to try to take away the right of others to decide differently.

            Finally, the Bible is rife with examples of abortion. Numbers comes immediately to mind.

            Edited to add: I used to be just as anti-choice as you are. And then I learned my mother’s story, and that of many others. Life is not so black-and-white as you seem to think it is. That’s when I realized that I couldn’t choose for anyone but me. I don’t know anyone’s circumstances but mine, and I don’t get to pick anyone else’s decisions on the reproduction flow chart as a result.

          • HeilMary1

            Bankruptcy, homelessness, disability, divorce, death and molestation by priests of orphans are great reasons for women to defend themselves against these calamities caused by childbirth.

          • colleen2

            Are you insane? Nobody is trying to convince you to murder your child.

          • Ann Peterson

            I didn’t say that any one was saying to murder the children that I have….I was saying that I didn’t believe the reasons being put forth to me as reasons to have an abortion were not compelling enough to get rid of an unborn child, to me.

          • fiona64

            Well, then, when you are the woman in that situation, you can choose pregnancy. Another woman in the identical situation doesn’t have to. You don’t get to determine what is, or is not, a “compelling enough” reason for anyone but yourself.

            That’s the essence of the pro-choice position, frankly.

      • Ann Peterson

        I don’t value the unborn more than the women who bear them, I value them as much as the women who bear them. I know as women we don’t always get to make the choice and are raped…but does that give us the o.k. to turn around and murder that innocent child? How does that make any kind of sense? I’m physically attacked soooo I now have the right to kill someone innocent of the crime?
        I don’t say anything about the irresponsible men who father children and then don’t take responsibility for them because as wrong as they are I have the right to make the choice of whether or not I’m going to create a child with those men in the first place. Just like it’s every women’s Choice of who she deems worthy to have sex with. We women are not stupid we know that when we have sex there is a possibility to contract a disease, or get pregnant (they are not the same thing). We have to quit playing the victim and take responsibility for our actions.
        I do hold those fathers who are deadbeats responsible (and have lobbied, written etc my elected officials) but that isn’t what the above article was about. I’m not saying it’s easy being a single parent for either sex, but just because something isn’t easy doesn’t mean it’s not the right and moral thing to do.

        • goatini

          Few things are more vicious and amoral than being a rape enabler and supporter of rapists’ rights.

          If the rapist impregnates his INNOCENT victim in the commission of his violent felony assault, and if the victim is forced into gestational slavery with the criminal’s tainted spawn, THE RAPIST HAS WON.

          You support rape and rapists’ rights. The VICTIM is the innocent party. A fetus, by definition, cannot be “innocent”. A state of innocence can only be attained by an actual living, breathing person with an equal capacity for the state of guilt.

          No one would hesitate to provide emergency medical care to make ANY OTHER VICTIM of a violent felony assault, as whole again as possible. But innocent victims of rape, according to rape enablers like yourself, don’t deserve even this basic level of humanity, courtesy, consideration, or compassion.

          • fiona64

            She claims to have been impregnated by rape. I have no reason to disbelieve her.

            What I *do* find unbelievable (in the sense that I am dumbfounded by it) is her insistence that every woman make the same decision that she did … on the apparent grounds that no woman who has ever been pregnant has realized that ::gasp:: she could choose to stay that way.

        • Jennifer Starr

          Why should a woman who’s been raped be forced to go through the trauma and physical hardship of an unwanted pregnancy and birth? Don’t you think she’s been through enough? If she chooses to, that’s one thing and that’s fine, but no one should be forced. Why not leave the choice up to her? Let her decide.

    • fiona64

      We women make our choice when we decide to have sex, and if your not
      mature/responsible enough to deal with the consequences don’t engage in
      it.

      You know, I keep re-reading this and cannot find any more clear translation than “if you don’t want to be pregnant, keep your legs together.” :-/

      • HeilMary1

        Yes! — who the hell do married couples think they are having sex with each other?! Don’t they knew fun, safe sex is only allowed between priests and altar boys and GOP playboys and their hookers?!

    • HeilMary1

      So married couples should give up sex and all women who don’t then deserve death and mutilation by dangerous childbirth? Would you continue a pregnancy that guaranteed you losing the nose on your face from a female fetus-caused face cancer or humiliating obstetric bladder and bowel incontinence?

  • goatini

    Time to go to forced-birth perjurer Stanek’s to upvote some sensible posts that support the incontrovertible civil, human and Constitutional rights of female US citizens, since her flying monkeys are infesting RHRC with their vile theocratic misogyny right now.

    • Jonathan Kuperberg

      Never posted at Jill Stanek’s site and rarely visit it.

      • HeilMary1

        Don’t like your own wacko peers?

  • Ann Peterson

    To Jennifer Starr: If I believed that the unborn baby wasn’t a person I would totally agree with you. I guess that’s were we differ…since I believe that the ‘unborn’ is a person I think it’s wrong to kill the unborn person because I was attacked. Do I personally think they should go to jail? No.

    • Jennifer Starr

      You’re speaking as if the unborn fetus were a completely separate someone that you could simply get up and walk away from anytime you wanted. While the unborn is human with separate DNA it is in residence inside the uterus of another. The uterus is more than just a location, Ann. Any person can care for a baby once it is born, but only a single woman can carry a pregnancy–no one else is able to be pregnant for her. And if it is a pregnancy which is forced upon you–which she did not ask for and could potentially affect a woman’s life and health in a negative way,I believe that the only person who can make that decision is the woman who is actually pregnant. And unless a woman has lived under a rock in the woods all her life, she does know about adoption or childbirth–it’s not exactly an alien concept–it’s rather condescending to pretend that women are so stupid that they don’t know about other options.

      And it’s not a question of blaming the fetus, which would be ridiculous, or wanting to punish the fetus for the sins of the rapist. That’s nothing but simplistic claptrap. It’s not about punishing or assigning blame to anyone. It’s whether the woman feels that she is physically and emotionally capable of handling a pregnancy at what is already probably one of the most difficult points in her life. And that’s a decision that only she can make. And she doesn’t need to make the decision that makes you happy, or me happy. She needs to make the decision that makes her happy. .

    • Jennifer Starr

      Additionally, Ann (as a sidenote), I tend to notice how the ‘pro-life’ side tends to act as if the fetus is already basically born and physically separated from the woman. Why is that? I noticed this when I went to Planned Parenthood in college for a pap smear–I was not pregnant, but the protesters outside apparently didn’t know this because they kept pleading for me to ‘give them the child’–as if they imagined that I was able to unzip my uterus and just hand it over. It would’ve been funny if it hadn’t been so bizarre.

  • mollyjb

    The vast majority of abortions are done in the first trimester, which is way before the fetus reaches viability.

    Only about 2% of so called abortions are done after 20 weeks but these are mainly medical emergencies where something has gone terribly wrong with the pregnancy. For example, a woman might have been diagnosed with cancer or the doctor finds out that the baby is missing vital organs and would never live outside of the mother.

    Women who have been raped or victims of incest might not know that they are pregnant until after 20 weeks. Studies have found that women who are rape victims suffer from post traumatic stress disorder, depression and other problems. It is unconscionable to deny them the ability to terminate the pregnancy instead of further traumatizing her by forcing her to carry the baby to term.

  • mollyjb

    The problem is that men have no self control! Men really need to keep their pants zipped up unless they want to be responsible for a child. If men want to have sex but no babies they should be forced to have a vasectomy. So there men! How do you like being told to do that?