If You Don’t Think Women Who Get Abortions Should Go to Jail, Don’t Support Criminalizing Abortion


Cognitive dissonance is one way to describe the thinking of those who agree with the criminalization of abortion, but don’t agree with penalties for those who break the law. What sometimes supports this apparently contradictory position is knowing someone who’s had an abortion. In Brazil, an estimated one million illegal abortions annually are matched by just 100 prosecutions. Many people know women who’ve had an illegal abortion, but even those who disapprove have no desire to see them go to jail.

These are the findings of a new survey in Brazil, published by Reproductive Health Matters. Participants in the survey expressed diverse opinions as to when abortion is and is not justifiable. Many knew someone who had had an abortion, and while participants were divided as to how liberal they were about abortion, most (over 50 percent) opposed jail sentences for women who have had abortions, and the vast majority (over 80 percent) opposed jail sentences for the women they knew. Similar views are expressed in a video shot in Ecuador, Peru, and Bolivia by Ipas. Even clinic-picketing antis who lobby loudly for the criminalization of abortion in the United States have been known to wriggle uncomfortably when asked to express exactly how long prison sentences should be for women who have abortions.

Though there is not a shred of evidence to support the view, it seems that many people who oppose abortion hope that criminalizing it will simply make the practice stop without the need to actually jail women. The truth is, of course, that abortions continue to take place regardless of whether they are safe or unsafe, legal or illegal. Moreover, where abortion is prohibited or restricted by law, women and providers will go to prison.

This has never been so starkly demonstrated as it is in a new report published by the International Campaign for Women’s Right to Safe Abortion, called Abortion in the Criminal Law: Exposing the Role of Health Professionals, the Police, the Courts and Imprisonment. The report presents evidence from around the world about women and health practitioners imprisoned for abortion-related crimes. The report highlights cases of women and practitioners prosecuted and imprisoned on every continent. Some women have been arrested after seeking help for complications of unsafe abortion, some after seeking care for spontaneous miscarriage or stillbirth.

The report presents numerous examples of women being subjected to degrading and humiliating treatment and having their rights violated in multiple ways, including being handcuffed to hospital beds, being forced to confess that they have had an abortion before being treated, and being refused abortions even when they meet the legal criteria to receive one. Having been handed over to the police, many have received extremely lengthy sentences—longer than those for convicted murderers—while some women have waited for years in prison to be charged, and, appallingly, some have been completely forgotten by the system and remain in prison without any prospect of either trial or release.

The report acknowledges the many abortion providers who have put their own careers and liberty at risk to help desperate women. Some have faced prosecution and jail, others fines, suspension from their jobs, and the closure of their clinics without being charged or prosecuted. However, it is also often providers, the very people women have entrusted with their lives, who are responsible for reporting them to the criminal justice system.

However, if, as the evidence suggests, even those who are opposed to abortion in principle often do not support imprisonment, there may be some glimmer of light in the darkness—a solid basis for a worldwide campaign to decriminalize abortion. Advocates must highlight the evidence, as the report does, that prosecutions and imprisonment are the logical and inevitable outcome of criminalizing abortion. We must drive a wedge into this gap between some people’s ambivalence about abortion and their intuitive distaste for imprisoning women. It is time to separate, isolate, and shame those who genuinely believe prosecution and imprisonment are an appropriate response to a woman who has (or may have had) an abortion, or a health worker who has provided one.

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

  • fiona64

    Yep. I’ve started asking this question of just about every anti-choicer who insists that a) abortion is murder and b) if it were illegal, abortion would just stop. As you state, almost all of them hem and haw … except for one who said that women should be executed for having abortions, and another who said that women should be jailed until menopause. Never mind that most women who have abortions already have one or more children at home to care for …

    The majority, though, did a little tap-dance about how “that isn’t the point.” Cognitive dissonance should, IMO, be physically painful.

    • colleen

      They don’t wish to appear harsh when they impose their religious ‘conscience’ on the rest of us. It looks bad when they’re forced to admit the consequences of their fanaticism. It’s one thing to sacrifice oneself for beliefs. It is hardly laudatory to insist that others who do not share these beliefs do so.

    • AZDem9933

      They’re liars. If you can stomach it, read the comments to Jill Stanek’s blog sometime. When they’re in their own space the truth comes out: they want to put women in jail.

    • fiona64

      Reply to Jennifer, in moderation:

      I’m sorry you swallowed the anti-choice nonsense hook, line and sinker. I was once just as anti-choice (and ignorant) as you … but then I got out of high school.

      Grow up and learn some *facts* instead of spewing emotional rhetoric. Good grief.

  • SadieLee

    Are you for forced pregnancy? Are you for forced childbirth? These are the questions I ask so-called “pro-life” picketers who confront me at counter-demonstrations in support of Planned Parenthood. I won’t listen to any answers that don’t directly address one of these questions — I just keep saying, don’t change the subject, answer the question. It makes people really uncomfortable — they don’t like the implications. Only one person has ever said yes — and as he said it, I could see he really didn’t like his own answer.

    • Cactus_Wren

      I’ve tried the same questions, but too often people sidestep with “No, I’m not for FORCED pregnancy, I don’t demand any woman be FORCED to get pregnant but once she IS pregnant she has to deal with the consequences! I’m not for FORCED childbirth but once a woman is pregnant birth happens NATURALLY, it doesn’t have to be forced!” (I usually reply with, “So what you’re saying is, she had sex, she must be punished.”)

      • Ineedacoffee

        The term deal with consequences makes me so angry in relation to pregnancy and abortion

        • Trollface McGee

          Yes, every time I hear the old “It’s a child not a choice” screed, I want to come back with “It’s a child, not a consequence.”

        • dance commander

          They always lie about ‘consequences’ and they start pasting dictionary definitions of what ‘consequences’ means.

          ‘It’s just a sequence of events’ they blithely say.

          I then point out that we don’t tell Nobel Prize winners that they had better ‘suffer the consequences of their actions and accept that nobel prize and all of the money and fame that comes with it’. We don’t tell our co-workers that they had better suck it up, and deal with the consequences of their hard work by accepting that pay raise!

          “consequences of your actions”, 99% of the time, is used negatively.

      • L-dan

        And honestly, abortion *is* ‘dealing with the consequences. Much like heart surgery is dealing with the consequences.

        The forced-birthers want consequences dealt with in the way *they* say you should deal with them. Which has very little to do with caring about you, or even the fetuses they supposedly are concerned about.

  • AZDem9933

    ” Advocates must highlight the evidence, as the report does, that prosecutions and imprisonment are the logical and inevitable outcome of criminalizing abortion.”

    I’ve been saying this for years. I even encounter people on our side who refuse to believe women will be prosecuted because the idea is so outlandish. But it’s not. The anti-choice movement is authoritarian at its core and authoritarians tend to get themselves into positions of authority. Under an abortion ban, and after 4 decades of a movement that has inflamed its followers to believe that women who abort are whores and murderers, women will face health care providers, cops, prosecutors, judges, etc., who are itching to put them in jail.

  • CJ99

    “cognitive dissonense” is really just what the fanatics do, lying to themselves to reinforce their delusions.

  • HeilMary1

    Obenshain, who could be VA’s next attorney general, introduced a bill for jailing women who didn’t report miscarriages to police within 24 hours. Considering that most miscarriages result in women simply getting late periods, imagine the chaos if all VA women had to report their periods as “miscarriages” to avoid jail! They’d have to wear special forensics panties and napkins to capture and preserve any caffeine- or alcohol-expelled “babies”. They’d have to turn all their icky bloody napkins and tampons over to the police. Instead of VA drivers just fuming over $500 red light or speeding caught-on-camera tickets, they’d now also be harassed, arrested and fined over their own or family members’ “negligent homicide” PERIODS!

    • Ella Warnock

      Part of me wishes for these authoritarian dictator types to get exactly what they’re asking for. They never, ever consider the possibility that sooner or later it wall all come back to bite them in the ass. Not only that, but most normal “christian” people (whatever that actually means) probably consider themselves “pro-life;” many of them probably also believe they really don’t have the right to make that call for others. I don’t think that particular group of people believe that some of the anti-choice loons are, well, as loony as they are. The more power the fascists gain, the more regular folks start paying attention to them, the greater the opportunity to discover just exactly how ugly and and maniacal they really are.

      Of course, that’s just an intellectual flight of fancy. Of course they should never be allowed to obtain that much power, as they certainly would never limit their control to abortion only. Most regular folks also don’t realize that they would, and are, going after the most effective forms of birth control; and if, as a woman, that doesn’t give you pause to wonder about the “pro-life” movement, I don’t know what will. Anyone who expects you to play russian roulette every time you have sex is certainly not “pro-YOUR-life.”

      • HeilMary1

        Well said!

        • Ella Warnock

          Thanks, Mary. 8^)

  • Cactus_Wren

    Do you see picking cotton as slavery? Do you see residing in a small room as imprisonment?

    • L-dan

      Forced to reside in a small room–yes that’s imprisonment.

      Forced to pick cotton for the enrichment of others–yes that may be slavery (there’s the whole ownership angle that’s invisible in that question, so it can’t be answered definitively with a yes or no.)

      Forced to remain pregnant? What would you call that?

      • Ella Warnock

        ‘Forced to remain pregnant? What would you call that?’

        **Why, falling in love with your baybee, of course**

      • Cactus_Wren

        Exactly.

    • Jennifer

      Neither of those has anything to do with pregnancy.

      • dance commander

        Forced gestation is slavery.

        Forcing someone to labour on behalf of another, and to torture someone on behalf of another IS the very definition of slavery.

      • Cactus_Wren

        Choosing versus being required to do something has nothing to do with choosing versus being required to do something?

        • Jennifer

          No, being forced to work because of your skin color has nothing to do with being required to keep a whole baby inside of you if you waited 12 weeks to try for an abortion.

          • dance commander

            Being forced to gestate a pregnancy just because you have a uterus = slavery.

          • HeilMary1

            Being forced to keep a rotting dead fetus inside you because it won’t deliver itself is slavery. Being denied removal of a deadly cancerous molar pregnancy is slavery. Being denied the removal of organ-killing toxic fetuses is slavery.

          • Jennifer

            I agree. But the claim of the peanut gallery that these deadly pregnancies are the only times late-term abortions occur is flat-out wrong. Carol Everett I’ve been told is a liar, and I will research her further; Nathanson and many others, though, I have a hard time believing are ALL lying after making big bucks off the industry for decades, nor is every doctor who changed his/her mind on the matter. I used to be on the side of those claiming I was lying, and I’m very glad I left it.
            I take it you’ve been a Catholic, HeilMary?

          • Jennifer Starr

            Actually, I used to be on your side, I used to call myself ‘pro-life’. And I’m extremely glad that I left it.

          • Jennifer

            I am still pro-choice when it comes to early abortions. But I was never ok with partial birth or D&E procedures, so I guess I never was on those people’s side.

          • goatini

            Which only displays your innate cruelty towards women even more. You know absolutely nothing about intact D&E, and how the crazy screechers forcing ridiculous laws that prevent physicians from performing procedures with best practices as the guiding principle have done more to HARM women with compromised pregnancies. Try looking it up, that is, if facts and truth won’t make your head explode.

          • L-dan

            This. On the one side you have a very tiny percentage of late term abortions taking place for reasons that we might have qualms about.

            On the other you have most of that subset of abortions taking place for heartbreaking reasons, or under conditions where doctors really need to not have their hands tied. Putting barriers in place directly harms people and increases the pain and trouble of already horrible circumstances.

            The moral weight of the latter far outweighs the former.

          • goatini

            And this little forced-birther nitwit is completely bereft of morality.

          • colleen

            Her ‘morality’ is dogma and lies.

          • Jennifer

            So the “tiny” percent of terrible deaths for babies, whether piercing their skulls (still legal in nine states), tearing up their limbs, or leaving them to die on a sterile table is entirely dismissable, and pales in comparison to setting possible barriers by limiting horrific ways of ending a possibly doomed child’s life? Thank God people like you are not in charge either.

          • L-dan

            Couldn’t stick the flounce, eh?

            The ‘leaving them to die on a sterile table’ thing? Really? You’re taking the word of mostly discredited, virulently anti-choice speakers with financial motivation to spin lurid tales over the investigations that find that this is not a widespread problem (or a problem at all in legal settings vs. illegal providers like Gosnell).

            Piercing their skulls no longer happens. As you’ve been told multiple times. Intact D&E (Partial birth abortion) is illegal. So great, in the cases where that would be the safest and most humane thing to do in a pregnancy gone horribly wrong, it’s not an option. Congratulations.

            Which pretty much leaves dismembering the fetus as the remaining option in cases where it has been determined that abortion makes more sense than induction due to the risks for the pregnant person. And yes, when you’re talking 8 months, there are risks present for them. Again, there is zero chance of pain before 24 weeks. And evidence that the conditions that exist pre-birth, and particularly during an abortion, make it likely that most feel nothing. Even if they do, it remains immoral to ban abortion.

            When you’re looking at approximately 1,000 in a year (per Guttmacher estimates of those past week 24…of which a very few are anywhere near the 8 month mark), that are performed anywhere close to the time you’re talking about, I weigh the pain and suffering of actual thinking feeling people who are making painful decisions about wanted pregnancies gone wrong over the handful of unconscious fetuses that *might* feel pain for a very short time.

            Those past week 24 happen for a number of reasons, all of them harrowing and sad. When you’re talking 8 months? That does not happen except for medical necessity. Legal abortions at that point are not done on a whim. Which you really aren’t getting through your head. If you think they are, please link to some examples of ‘frivolous’ 8 month abortions. Otherwise we’re going to continue thinking you’re pulling those ‘facts’ out of your ass.

          • fiona64

            They never do stick with the flounce.

            The whole “I’m taking my pail and shovel and leaving the seashore” thing is a desperate bid for attention. If someone really wants to leave, they just do it … without behaving like a petulant toddler. I’d not be at all surprised to learn that she stuck her tongue out when she wrote her “I’m leaving” post …

          • L-dan

            Yeah. I tend to just walk off when I get tired. I may do a “one more rebuttal so you don’t think I went all “omg I can’t refute their amazing logic, I must flee!” post.

          • dance commander

            So you would prefer if every abortion was performed by c-section or if women were just left to die from pregnancy because it really bothers you that a fetus (which can’t feel pain) will die?

          • HeilMary1

            Jennifer prefers mothers be sawed in half to remove their already dead fetuses in one piece.

          • HeilMary1

            That’s nothing compared to deadly obstructed labor shredding women’s lady parts, bladders and bowels, or $5,000,000 flesh-eating infected c-sections.

          • goatini

            This one really, really gets his/her thrills from thinking about fake fetus pr0n.

          • Jennifer

            I know a good deal about how some of those procedures are blind and performed by grasping for the fetus with clamps and pulling parts out, little by little; they do not all result in intact babies by any stretch. Cruelty towards women indeed, you ignorant and stupid fool.

          • dance commander

            Would you prefer all abortions were performed through c-section?

          • fiona64

            You have clearly demonstrated that you don’t “know a good deal” about anything.

          • HeilMary1

            Google obstetric fistulas and symphysiotomies done in Irish Catholic hospitals for real cruelty.

          • goatini

            The fool here is the one who screeches made-up nonsense because s/he knows nothing about the intact D&E procedure.

          • goatini

            Tell us again about the “labor” cure for ectopic pregnancies, ignorant and stupid fool.

          • Ineedacoffee

            Your not pro choice
            Pro choice means you support someones right to make a choice even if you wouldnt choose it for yourself

          • goatini

            I’m quite sure she never WAS pro-choice. That’s just dishonest forced-birther BS that’s part of their standard operating procedure.

          • Jennifer

            The way you fools work yourselves into a frenzy over your imaginary pictures of my life is really a kick. You get more foam-mouthed by one “anti-choicer” than pro-lifers do over a good amount of ignorant children.

          • colleen

            I personally do not give a flying fuck about your personal life.

          • dance commander

            Yeah, Christians are persecuted, especially in America.

            Tell us more about how your rights are infringed upon by the gays and the women who want to use contraception and control their own destiny.

          • fiona64

            And you’ve personally demonstrated why Christianity is losing adherents in droves.

            I’m sure Jesus is proud of you.

          • goatini

            Doesn’t that hair shirt get just too itchy for you sometimes?

          • fiona64

            I thought about suggesting that she get down from the cross; someone could use the wood.

          • expect_resistance

            The RH community of pro-choice people believe in a woman’s bodily autonomy, defend a woman’s right to choice. We advocate for reproductive health and freedom. We are often attacked by anti-choicers that are offensive, disrespectful, uninformed, and downright rude. Your comments paints us with a wide brush of inaccurate judgements. We are not “extremist nuts.”

          • cjvg

            -We are not the ones who are arguing that your choices must be made for you by others.
            -We are not the ones arguing that you should not have the right to make your own reproductive choices
            -We are not the ones arguing that we have the right to usurp your right to determine who you have to birth, what you must endure, and which medical risks your body can be forced to undergo.
            -We are not the ones who feel justified in dictating what choices others are allowed to have according to our personal feelings.
            -We are not the ones who feel comfortable demanding that the consequences of our choices must be born by others who’s personal, social, medical, financial circumstances we do not even know.

            It is laughable that you claim persecution, you are the one trespassing into the life of others with no other justification then a smug claim to be a Christian.

            Persecution is when you are the one suffering for the believes and actions of another!
            The only ones who are suffering persecution are the women who you want to force to suffer the consequences of your “believes”

          • Arekushieru

            We are not anti-life. We are Pro-Life in the same manner as Wendy Davis. Very few of your ilk would ever deign to be as courageous as that. You, however, have proven yourself to be VERY anti-life. As in you don’t care if a woman dies from a late-term pregnancy, because, “EWWWWW, late-term abortion is ICKY.”.

            Of course, you complain about how we are high-fiving each other, then almost immediately go on to proclaim how you are going to return to a certain online site and do the very same thing. Hypocrisy, thy name is Pro-’Life’?

            Of course, leave it to a Pro-’Life’ CHRISTIAN to become a whiny baby once they experience even an OUNCE of the very same persecution they’ve meted out to others.

            And you are SURPRISED that you encountered such virulent responses, when you want women to DIE from untenable pregnancies and leave their children orphans (because most women who HAVE abortions have children, already) because you believe your view of late-term abortions is the only moral position worthy of being imposed on others….

            Seriously, tone policing much?

          • dance commander

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partial-Birth_Abortion_Ban_Act

            PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION HAS BEEN BANNED

            DO YOU UNDERSTAND

          • Arekushieru

            Which is a made-up term and the procedure was also banned by the antis. That these same antis then gasp and moan over the fetuses being pulled apart by the next least risky procedure to the woman’s health being performed in an abortion is pure fucking hypocrisy and bullshit.

          • HeilMary1

            You need to read up more on later term pregnancies that go unexpectedly bad. Since such abortions can cost $30,000, no low- or middle-income woman would frivolously have such abortions even they wanted to.

          • goatini

            It is a FACT that in the United States, ALL safe, legal late-term terminations are either for tragic fetal and/or maternal diagnoses, OR for the truly “hard cases”.

            And the “big bucks” are in the billion-dollar global human trafficking adoption syndicate, that uses ignorant people like you as their dupes to attempt to interfere with the civil, human and Constitutional rights of female US citizens. FACT.

            Screeching your vicious anti-woman lies over and over again does not magically turn them into the truth.

          • Cactus_Wren

            goatini, Jennifer thinks (see her message above) that anything after TWELVE WEEKS is “late term”.

          • goatini

            Proving once again that You Can’t Fix Stupid.

          • fiona64

            That’s because Jennifer is an idiot.

          • Jennifer

            If you’re not aware that the fetus is a child well before the third trimester, it shows you have an ignorance of science that’s far more dangerous than any ignorance of labels. What amazes me is how you think bitching at someone like a Rottweiler will get them to take you seriously.

          • fiona64

            I’m sorry that simple English is lost on you. All children, everywhere, are *born entities.* Prior to birth, the developmental stages are zygote/embryo/fetus. *After* birth, you have infant, child, adolescent, adult.

            I ask you this in all sincerity: were you *homeschooled?* Because that’s the only explanation I can come up with for such woeful ignorance about the development of viviparous vertebrates.

          • dance commander

            Children are born.

            Children are not non-sentient non-sapient lumps of tissue.

          • goatini

            What amazes me is how you think repeating BS lies and deliberate manipulative deception will get people to take you seriously.

          • Ella Warnock

            Hope does spring eternal, doesn’t it. ;-)

          • choiceone

            A fetus is not a child. It is you who have an ignorance of science. A child is completely, absolutely biologically separated from the woman who was pregnant with it. You are like a kid in a primary school science class looking through a microscope at a dividing cell and declaring that there are two cells when they have not yet completely divided. When the division is complete, you have two (or more). Before that, there is only one individual member of Homo s. sapiens, or one individual member of an elephant species, etc. As long as the fetus is living as a part of the woman’s body, it IS part of the woman’s body.

          • Jennifer

            As in, something that would require dismantling a tiny child with limbs. Have you seen what aborted children look like even in the second trimester? Oh yeah, you don’t care.

          • dance commander

            Would you be happier if they were removed by c-section?

          • L-dan

            Not really. What it looks like may have some bearing on emotional arguments and very little on arguments about say, not granting it more rights than pregnant people have, or considering the realities of all the reasons why abortions happen.

            I don’t believe pretty people should receive preferential treatment in employment or justice for similar reasons to not believing that what a fetus looks like has any bearing on the abortion debate.

          • Jennifer Starr

            That’s not a definition of late term. Late term is anything past the point of viability, generally 24 weeks.

          • HeilMary1

            I am PROUDLY ex-Catholic.

          • fiona64

            You really are woefully ignorant. First of all, the same physicians that deliver infants (ob/gyn) are the ones who perform abortions — and believe you me, there are far “bigger bucks” in labor and delivery than in abortion. Most of the docs who work in clinics do so pro bono, to help the underprivileged.

            Oh, pro bono? That means they don’t charge.

          • Arekushieru

            Sorry, but they’re making even BIGGER bucks now that they left the clinics where they provided abortions. Providing abortions is a MINUSCULE profit to what they would make as pregnancy, labour and delivery providers. I take it you haven’t read the article on the website talking about how having twins more than DOUBLES the cost of pregnancy and child-rearing costs, which were already an astronomical expense?That would be typical, so I’m not surprised….

            NO one is claiming that these pregnancies are the ONLY times late-term abortions occur. YOU are the one making the claim that we ARE. Speaking of making claims, if you’re against late-term abortions merely because a TINY PERCENTAGE of them are done for purposes other than health reasons (although, I don’t know when you decided that you were better at medical diagnoses than an actual medical PROFESSIONAL), then you should tell us why we are the ones denying the humanity of a fetus, when you deny the MAJORITY of women seeking late-term abortions life-saving healthcare, and/or, if you believe it is all or the majority of cases, provide us with proof. DERP.

          • Alex Harman

            Being forced to carry a healthy pregnancy to term and bear a child against your will is a form of slavery, but I’d call all three of the situations you just cited “murder by medical neglect,” not slavery. Slavery generally isn’t immediately fatal, after all, as the owner wants to get as much labor as possible out of his slaves.

          • Cactus_Wren

            Who said anything about skin color?

          • goatini

            A racist.

          • fiona64

            I guess she thinks that enslavement only happens to non-white people working on plantations.

            I also guess she’s never cracked a history book in her life.

          • colleen

            being forced to gestate because of your body parts isn’t all that different from being forced to work because some asshole thinks he owns you.

          • Arekushieru

            Being required to work because of your skin colour has nothing to do with being REQUIRED to keep a whole *FETUS* inside of you if you waited 12 weeks to try for an abortion? Pretty sure that violates the same principle, usage of your body against your will because of a certain feature/function. DERP.

  • Cactus_Wren

    Do you want to force people to remain pregnant when they do not want to be? That’s forced pregnancy.

    • Jennifer

      That’s what after-morning pills or early abortions are for. But late-term abortions are horrific, disgusting things.

      • L-dan

        You realize that most late term abortions are for things like pregnancies that are causing major health issues for the pregnant person, or severe fetal anomalies? A few fall in that 20-24 week range because of the difficulties in scraping together funds in a hurry or scheduling an abortion (particularly in states that have restricted it down to the point of having one clinic in the entire state).

        These are also a very small portion of all abortions, and yet they’re the ones brought out by those trying to make all abortion illegal.

        Wouldn’t all that effort be better put toward sex education, contraceptive access, and better access to early abortions? I think the rest can be left to doctors and their patients to figure out.

        • Jennifer

          Things like ectopic pregnancies are generally done by simply inducing labor; fetal abnormalities are not reasons to end the baby’s life brutally, especially for matters as trivial as the ones I’ve heard.

          • L-dan

            Ectopic pregnancy is not a common cause of late term abortions, because they will kill someone if they are left untreated that late. So I’m not really sure how that comes into play.

            Fetal abnormalities that would end a baby’s life brutally in the few hours they would live after birth? Assuming they even survive until birth. Those that would mean a short life full of pain and surgery? You’re woefully uneducated on the scope of things that can go seriously wrong.

          • Jennifer

            One woman who had an ectopic pregnancy ended gave birth to what was indeed a small baby; they can be late enough to do that. I am not woefully uneducated at all; I simply don’t believe the possibility of pain from birth justifies a horrifically painful death from a doctor.

          • dance commander

            Oh yes, you are an uneducated twit and it is painfully obvious.

            they can be late enough to do that.

            If the egg attaches itself to the outside of the uterine will the chances are very very slim that the fetus can be carried to viability. But, the majority of ectopic pregnancies are fatal for the woman and the embryo. An embryo that has attached to a fallopian tube = death for itself and the woman.

            I simply don’t believe the possibility of pain from birth justifies a horrifically painful death from a doctor.

            Fetuses begin to develop a minimal brain stem at 7 weeks, but are not capable of consciousness until the third trimester and most likely remain unconscious until birth. As one brain scientist puts it: “the fetus and neonate appears incapable of … experiencing or generating ‘true’ emotion or any semblance of higher order, forebrain mediated cognitive activity.”

            This is why on those unfortunate third trimester abortions, anesthesia is given to both the fetus and the pregnant woman.

            Yeah, you would know this, if you were as educated as you claim.

            Dumbfuck.

          • L-dan

            Sorry, if you think that-in general-a late term ectopic pregnancy can simply be handled by birthing, yes you are woefully uneducated. The very rare cases of live infants recovered from ectopic pregnancies are not tubal pregnancies (they rupture before getting that far), and are generally C-sections, not induced labor.

            Again, your portrayal of horrifically painful death is not the reality. The structures are not there to even feel pain before about 26 weeks, nor is there consensus that fetuses are able to feel it even after that as they seem to exist in an anesthitized state, which would certainly be a mercy given the pain of birth.

          • Jennifer

            Sorry, I’m taking the word of nurses and doctors over anyone here. And let me ask you this: if a woman was sedated, would it be ok to pierce her skull or kill her in some other way? A female nurse who had an ectopic pregnancy ended said that few such pregnancies are handled by brutal abortions.

          • L-dan

            Vs. brutal rupturing of a fallopian tube? Sounds like a fine trade to me.

            You never did answer the questions below.

            3. So you are for forcing people through pregnancy?

            4. To get back to the point of the article: So, if they know
            perfectly well what they’re doing, and you think what they’re doing is
            wrong, what do you think should happen to them?

          • dance commander

            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1251665

            Abdominal.

            It is impossible to survive an ectopic tubal pregnancy, dumbass.

            if a woman was sedated, would it be ok to pierce her skull or kill her in some other way?

            A woman who is sedated still has the capacity for sentience. An incomplete and partially formed embryo/fetus has neither the capacity for sentience nor the capacity to feel pain.

          • HeilMary1

            Read up on the grisly horrors of obstructed labor — a stuck fetal head gets rammed against pelvic bones for days by the uterus until it rots off. Without intervention, nature slowly decapitates the fetus ANYWAY! And leaves mothers with stinky shredded bladder and bowel incontinence if they survive!

          • Arekushieru

            They are not infringing on anyone’s right to bodily autonomy. That’s the ONE fine distinction you just can’t seem to grasp, for some reason. If they WERE, their ‘right to not feel pain’ is superseded by my right to bodily autonomy. DERP.

            And, most of us are taking the words of nurses and doctors over you.

          • colleen

            With beliefs like that you and your religion can, will and does kill actual born women and their deaths are generally long and painful. Please stop demanding that other women sacrifice their lives for your beliefs. You are indeed woefully uneducated.

          • Jennifer

            Colleen, I am for saving the lives of mothers, ending unwated pregnancies very early on, and against the horrible, late-term abortions that involve killing children, sometimes for reasons such as Down Syndrome. To say I’m for sacrificing mothers is very inaccurate. Please look into the site http://www.whitewashedfeminist.wordpress.com and type the word “ectopic” in the search engine if you’d like more info about one of my many sources that have helped me form my educated opinions on these matterd; the moderator named Anne is a nurse who ended an ectopic pregnancy, and her views match mine almost to the letter. You can read my comments in the comment sections too, supporting her and very harsh towards people who judge women like her. If a late-term fetus has no viable organs, or lacks a brain, then I would support the idea of a humane abortion. That’s probably the last thing I’ll say here, plus the fact that babies should not be required to sacrifice their lives either for people’s beliefs either; in later pregnancies, there are TWO people involved.

          • dance commander

            , and against the horrible, late-term abortions that involve killing children, sometimes for reasons such as Down Syndrome

            Prove it.

            If a late-term fetus has no viable organs, or lacks a brain, then I would support the idea of a humane abortion.

            And health of the mother or SEVERE fetal deformity are the ONLY reasons for post-viability abortions.

            You are arguing against SOMETHING THAT DOESN’T EVEN FUCKING HAPPEN

            What’s it like being so fucking stupid Jennifer?

          • Jennifer

            You have a Internet sweetie, look it up. Your vicious words alone prove your rabid denial. Yeahhh, the ONLY reasons anyone’s ever had a late-term abortion..said no doctor ever.

          • dance commander

            You made the claim, the burden of proof is on YOU

            And since post-viability abortions are ILLEGAL and since statistics don’t back up your claims it is clear that you are MAKING SHIT UP.

          • Jennifer

            You believe that all you want, sweetie.

          • dance commander

            No, the burden of proof really IS on you.

            If you make a claim you are supposed to back it up. I thought you said you were educated? If you were, you would realize that the burden of proof is ALWAYS on the person making the claim.

            If i say that the moon is made of cheese I have to prove it, I can’t make the statement and expect everyone to believe me and then do all my work for me by researching it.

            Oh, and btw, I have ALREADY disproven all of your nonsense. Multiple times.

          • Jennifer

            You haven’t proven for a second that all states forbid late-term abortion, that late-term babies don’t feel and that the only partial births ever performed have been done to save lives. The liar and fool is you, and I don’t need to prove my points to deniars like you because you already have shown you don’t believe late-term babies are children, so you won’t care what happens to them. Keep living in your sedated world.

          • goatini

            It’s vastly proven and documented that ALL late-term safe, legal pregnancy terminations in the United States ARE for (1) tragic fetal &/or maternal diagnoses or (2) the truly “hard cases”. And we are not going to sit here and let you lie about it.

          • Jennifer

            “Hard” cases? Like health issues for the baby that are by no means life-threatening? Sure.

          • goatini

            “Hard cases” are about tragic circumstances around the ONLY patient in the equation – the living, breathing WOMAN. Tragic circumstances that I wouldn’t even wish on someone like YOU.

          • dance commander

            I suggest that you actually do some reading before you start spouting off on shit you know nothing about you ignorant, lying sack of shit.

          • HeilMary1

            Life-threatening for NINE-YEAR-OLD RAPED mothers, jackass!

          • dance commander

            I have proven you wrong just as everyone else here has. Put your money where your mouth is and tell us about an 8th month abortion that was done for recreational reasons. Put up or shut up.

          • dance commander

            And partial birth abortion was banned years ago. Wtf do u keep bringing up something that does not happen!? Could it be because you do not have a leg to stand on?

          • Jennifer

            If that’s so, why didn’t you mention it before? Just found that out? After reading your claim, I googled it and Wikipedia says it has been banned; that’s a huge relief to me, as I’d been receiving many conflicting reports. However the article also states that “A 2007 article in The Boston Globe reported that, in response to this statute, many abortion providers had adopted the practice of injecting the fetus with lethal drugs before all late-term abortions. Typically, a concentrated salt solution is injected directly into the fetal heart using ultrasound to guide the needle. Even though these providers do not perform intact dilation and extraction procedures, they feel the broad wording of the ban compels them “to do all they can to protect themselves and their staff from the possibility of being accused.”"

            So it would appear that one of the people here claiming that saline abortions are no longer performed could also be incorrect; it certainly sounds like saline. And even if it’s not, or late in the third trimester, it literally involves injecting the heart with something that will kill it. Your statement about fetuses not being able to feel later-term abortions if they’re not sedated, or that no late-term abortion has ever been done without life-saving reasons, are also false (one pro-choice woman shared an article describing how she had her son’s heart stopped with a lethal injection because they feared he’d have breathing problems). It looks like there have been inaccurate claims on both sides here, which has happened quite often before. But unlike you, I’m willing to acknowledge them by researching the matter further. And unfortunately, the often graphic practices of D&E, or tearing up a tiny child as it often involves, are still very legal. I’ll be looking into it anyway, probably more than you.

          • dance commander

            http://www.rcog.org.uk/news/rcog-release-rcog-updates-its-guidance

            The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) releases two Working Party reports today: Fetal Awareness and Termination of Pregnancy for Fetal Abnormality.
            The first updates the previous report published in 1997, while the
            latter replaces the 1996 report. Both documents were commissioned by
            the Department of Health, following recommendations by the House of
            Commons Science and Technology Committee in 2008.

            A wide range of stakeholders including scientists, doctors, midwives
            and lay representatives were involved in producing these reports.
            Relevant international scientific studies published since the 1990s were
            considered by the respective working parties as was evidence submitted
            to the Science and Technology Committee. An online public consultation
            followed and the public were invited to submit their views. Both
            documents went through rigorous peer-review which included academics,
            ethicists and lawyers.

            To reflect new research findings and the advances in clinical
            practice, both original documents have been completely rewritten. These
            two new reports contain information for clinicians, researchers and
            healthcare professionals and the report on Fetal Awareness includes a
            new chapter with practical information and advice to women and parents.

            The main findings from each document are listed below.

            Fetal Awareness

            The fetus cannot feel pain before 24 weeks because the connections in the fetal brain are not fully formed

            Evidence examined by the Working Party showed that the fetus, while
            in the chemical environment of the womb, is in a state of induced sleep
            and is unconscious

            The Working Party concluded that because the 24 week-old fetus has
            no awareness nor can it feel pain, the use of analgesia is of no benefit

            More research is needed into the short and long-term effects of the use of fetal analgesia post-24 weeks.

            Termination of Pregnancy for Fetal Abnormality

            The Working Party concluded that it is unrealistic to produce a
            definitive list of conditions that constitute ‘serious’ handicap since
            accurate diagnostic techniques are as yet unavailable. Likewise, the
            consequences of abnormality are difficult to predict

            The Working Party recommends that the NHS Fetal Anomaly Screening
            Programme is centrally linked so that the outcome of pregnancies with
            specific congenital abnormalities are monitored over time.

            Appropriate information and support should be offered to all women undergoing antenatal screening

            In the case of a possible termination of pregnancy, all staff caring
            for the mother must adopt a non-directive, non-judgemental and
            supportive approach.

          • Jennifer

            What do you know, one more useful thing; thank you, which I found while trying to see if I missed any of Jennifer’s posts. But as I said before, many abortions take place after 24 weeks. Which is why, in great part, people from both political parties voted largely to outlaw partial birth.

          • L-dan

            No, *many* abortions do not take place after 24 weeks.

            Only 1.5% take place after 21 weeks, and of those a tiny number are after 24 weeks. Guttmacher estimates about 1000 per year (estimates, since the US doesn’t keep statistics that break down gestational age week by week).

            Past 24 weeks, those 1000 abortions include life-threatening conditions and gross fetal abnormalities. Every time someone goes on about this range and anyone says ‘well how about this horrible story, or these dozen?’ the forced-birth advocate is usually “ah well, yes, those are justified…but these other ones that I’m not actually going to give you any evidence for are totally frivolous and horrible”.

            So, have any evidence for those frivolous late term abortions, and their frequency? I’m sure there must be plenty for it to be worth all this energy and screaming that could be aimed toward: improving sex education, contraceptive access, early term abortion access, economic justice to allow more people the means to raise families, research on birth defects so there are fewer of them, etc. and so forth. All of which would improve more lives than ranting against late term abortions.

          • HeilMary1

            They were giving in to pressure from PEDOPHILE PRIESTS.

          • L-dan

            That is not a saline abortion. Those involve injecting saline (or other substances) into the amniotic sac to induce abortion. It’s mostly vanished in first world countries because it’s more dangerous than other methods and not as reliable.

            Isn’t injecting the heart to kill the fetus before the abortion more humane if you’re worried about it feeling pain during the procedure?

            Again, to get back to the topic of this article, what should happen to those who chose these very late term abortions, apparently for reasons you feel are too minor to be justifiable?

          • HeilMary1

            Google grisly symphysiotomies forced on women in Ireland to avoid “sinful contraceptive” C-SECTIONS!

          • HeilMary1

            Stay drunk on that Kool-Aid.

          • goatini

            Commander is correct, you haven’t posted one fact in your silly little forced-birther tantrums.

          • goatini

            And NO woman’s reason to exercise her civil, human and Constitutional rights to avail herself of a safe, legal pregnancy termination is ANY of YOUR BUSINESS.

          • HeilMary1

            Can YOU afford a 2.5 MILLION DOLLAR child with Down Syndrome? Disabilities don’t pay for themselves and forced-birther GOP politicians would cut off all government aid to the born disabled if they could get away with it.

          • Lily_ZzTop

            That’s sadly so true, Heil. They despise all breathing humans who aren’t in their 1% buddy club! Well, at least most of them do. Love the fetus, hate the child….. is the saying I believe…. and most -definitely- hate the child’s PARENT(S)…. who especially if she/they are young will most likely be low-income and thus require financial assistance (unless they are fortunate enough to have all their and their child’s needs covered by her family, most are not). But if these GOP fine “fiscally-responsible” Americans have anything to do with it, these parasite TAKERS won’t get a dime!!! >GET OUT THERE AND WORK YOU LAZY SLOBS! What, you need childcare, BAH!! SCUMBAG!! I mean..humbug!! YOU BRATS SHOULD HAVE THOUGHT HAVE THAT BEFORE YOU GOT PREGNANT!! NO FOOD STAMPS, RENT ASSISTANCE, WIC, OR HEAD START FOR YOU, BAH!!!!!!! I AM A MIGHTY REPUBLICAN, HEAR ME ROARRR!! I STARVE CHILDREN BY TAKING AWAY POOR PEOPLE’S FOOD STAMPS, THEN I EAT THEIR WITHERED BODIES FOR BREAKFAST!! MMM, TASTES GOOD!! BAHHH!! LOOK AT ME, LOOK AT ALL THE ‘FISCAL’ I’M CONSERVING, MY BILLIONAIRE BOSSES WILL BE SO PROUD! WHY YES, MR. LOBBYIST, I’D LOVE TO TAKE ANOTHER BRIBE, ERRRR, OH GEEZ, I MEAN CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION!!! (shakes nervously) WE’LL JUST KEEP THAT LITTLE SLIP BETWEEN US, EY?? GOOD MAN! (claps on back)<

          • HeilMary1

            And fetal idolaters commit the most adultery, fornication, incest, rape, pedophilia, infanticide, etc.

          • goatini

            Referencing a misogynistic, theocratic forced-birther blog that contains NO actual facts or scientific information whatsoever = FAIL

          • colleen

            I’ve just read your thoughts on ectopic pregnancies and problem pregnancies. If we allow people like you to practice medicine by altering the laws you WILL kill women. Because you are a right wing Christian you won’t accept responsibility for their deaths.

            The fact that you believe that a zygote/embryo/fetus is a ‘person’ is YOUR belief just as it is your belief that you have the right to impose your religion on the rest of us. Feminists don’t treat other women like breeding livestock. Call yourself something else

          • Jennifer

            I never called myself a feminist, Colleen. Apparently you missed my clear support of women ending ectpic pregnancies or doomed pregnancies, which one of my friends did, mentioning this now for the the tenth time. And lol, abortion doctors never kill women, right? Actually they’ve done double, they’ve practiced killing women and babies both. Yaaayyy pro-women! Sorry, but my “belief” about later fetuses has been supported by numerous experts.

          • L-dan

            Abortion is far less risky than giving birth. Do you also accuse those delivering babies of killing women when their patients die of complications? How about surgeons in any other specialty?

          • dance commander

            I thought you had left because you couldn’t take all of the abuse from the heartless baby killers here.

            Why do you keep coming back?

          • fiona64

            Early abortion is 14 times safer than childbirth. http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/23/us-abortion-idUSTRE80M2BS20120123

            You’re welcome.

          • expect_resistance

            From everything you’ve said you haven’t made an educated or articulate argument. You’ve parroted the lies and bullshit from anti-choice/forced birthers. The RH Reality site has a wide variety of educational resources. See the menu for sections, topics, video, and audio on the main page.

          • Arekushieru

            But sacrificing women is SOOO much better. /sarcasm.

          • Jennifer Starr

            My aunt nearly died from an ectopic pregnancy in the early ’90s because some volunteer at a CPC told her that a doctor could move the pregnancy from the fallopian tube to the uterus. This is patently untrue, yet because the young woman was wearing a lab coat, my aunt thought that she knew something about medicine. She nearly died looking for a doctor who could do that before one talked some sense into her and ended the pregnancy. But she nearly died, all because of ‘pro-life’.

          • Jennifer

            I’m so sorry that happened to her. My friend, the nurse whose site I linked to for Colleen, spoke of the need for many such pregnancies being ended, and how it’s problematic for a “pro-life” person to disregard the life of the MOTHER, especially for a doomed fetus.

          • goatini

            Women become mothers AT BIRTH. Stop your use of false and misleading terminology to attempt to catapult your anti-woman forced-birth agenda.

          • HeilMary1

            NO pregnancy should ever be coerced because of last minute unpredictable complications. Ectopic pregnancies are just a fraction of the deadly risks.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Technically, by definition an ectopic pregnancy is any pregnancy outside of the uterus. Generally in the fallopian tubes, but sometimes in the abdomen. Either way it’s a dangerous situation and generally the pregnancy cannot progress normally. If a woman chooses to carry an ectopic pregnancy in those cases, that’s her choice, but the only person who should be able to decide whether she is willing to take that risk is the person who’s actually pregnant.

          • Jennifer

            Jennifer, as of now, I’m no longer responding to comments on this page; in fact, I’m probably going to block this address on my email. You can reach me at other pages on this site. I’m still curious as to how you got the idea of my father’s specialty; I didn’t even leave my last name here.

          • Jennifer Starr

            You connected via your Twitter. Not exactly a state secret. And I hope you realize that since the notifications are sent via disqus, if you block disqus, you’ll no longer get any notifications from any site you post on.

          • Jennifer

            I didn’t say it was, though I don’t even remember mentioning that on Twitter. Just as well if I don’t get anymore notifications. But I’ll leave this: Dance guy here said most abortions consist of bloody tissue and supplied a picture. I don’t dispute those, but I do dispute the two types found in pictures here:
            http://www.customtermpapers.org/term-paper-examples/featured/abortion-term-paper/

            The first one must be pretty late in the first trimester, but whether the being feels it or not, it’s definitely more than tissue, and the second one shown is startlingly so (the writer of that paper cites sources at the end and appears to be pro-choice). Another article using sources is here, by a pro-life woman: http://wellspentjourney.wordpress.com/2012/10/01/abortion-methods-an-overview/
            I also read an article on a pro-choice site that interviewed the cold Dr. Robinson, a friend and colleage of Tiller and his nasty late-term abortions. The article said either those abortions or most of them are illegal in all but nine states, and Robinson proudly provides them and hopes to spread them out legally again. These disgusting practices are still legal, still performed on feeling fetuses after 24 weeks, and dismissing them by their comparitvely small number would be like dismissing pregnant rape victims because of their comparibly small number. Too bad Robinson hasn’t thawed out in her later years.

            Goodnight Jennifer. If you’d like to talk further, you’ve seen my Twitter.

          • Cactus_Wren

            (laughing hysterically)

            You’re seriously offering as a cite a TERM PAPERS page?

          • Jennifer

            One with numerous sources, Cactus heart. Laugh it up. Fact is, you don’t care; you’ve probably seen the pictures of dead babies before and you don’t give a rat’s ass; you know what they are scientifically and it’s by philosophy, and some partial science, that you justify what happens to them.

          • L-dan

            No, we do know what fetuses look like. I mean really? The structures in that first one are basically blobs they had to assemble into something personlike. Not surprising given the size and what that indicates about its age.

            We just don’t feel that looking human is the same thing as being a person, nor that it confers rights greater than the actual Person it’s attached to for life support.

          • dance commander

            FYI, many pro-choice women have babies and love them dearly.

            One of the regular posters here, fiona, spent 10 months suffering from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperemesis_gravidarum to bring her child to term.

            “Hyperemesis gravidarum (HG) is a complication of pregnancy characterized by intractable nausea, vomiting, and dehydration and is estimated to affect 0.5–2.0% of pregnant women.[1][2] Malnutrition and other serious complications, such as fluid or electrolyte imbalances, may result.”

            It can kill you. She made the CHOICE. So kindly shut the fuck up with all of your blatant lies about how pro-choice women are heartless baby killers who dream about killing babies and torturing babies every second of their lives.

          • fiona64

            Thank you, DC.

            Yeah, Jennifer is ignorant about a whole lot of things — including the fact that ::gasp:: pro-choice women have kids.

          • Arekushieru

            Most of the Pro-’Life’ sites have failed to impress me. Pro-Choice sites USUALLY impress me.

            And you don’t give a rat’s ass about the women who carried them. …it’s by philosophy, and some partial science, that you justify what happens to them. Thanks.

          • goatini

            Drs Robinson and Tiller are moral giants of compassion who respect women and respect their civil, human and Constitutional rights. Unlike you.

          • dance commander

            Dr. Tiller aborted fetii like this:

            http://www.indmedica.com/journals/images/CurrPedRes/013_01_07_fig_01.jpg

            And this:

            http://www.uoguelph.ca/~rfoster/repropath/FOP/flag08.jpg

            And this:

            http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/736x/ae/d8/3d/aed83d2ff5f1b926e48abe19f3b08137.jpg

            Sorry if it offends you. Perhaps you would prefer to see women suffer and carry these fetii to term and cry over all of the pain of having to birth a very WANTED baby that is terribly deformed.

            You sick cruel ignorant fuck.

          • dance commander

            And I have repeatedly proven you wrong on the fetal pain thing, so you can STFU.

            Every time you type you look like an even bigger idiot.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Did you ever consider the fact that Robinson, like Tiller, really cares about women in desperate situations, which, despite your denials, is what women who need a late-term abortion are in?

          • Jennifer Starr

            Yes, I’ve seen pictures. Many pictures, and I know the history behind the pictures. I also know that many of the pictures were actually miscarriages and stillbirths. As I said, I used to be pro-life. But pictures don’t change my belief that decisions about a pregnancy must be made by woman who is actually pregnant.

          • HeilMary1

            Your pompous preference that women be sawed in half for non-viable fetuses is pretty disgusting.

          • Arekushieru

            So, WHO was the one who likes to base personhood and rights on looks, again?

            Ah, but you see, you wouldn’t call the rape victims ‘rape’ victims.

          • dance commander

            <3 Jennifer starr

          • dance commander

            So her fetal neuroscientist expert dad is really an optometrist eh?

            lol

            Oh, and funny how she assumes I am a a guy. Must be because of the name. “Commander”. Only men can be commanders, yes?

          • Jennifer

            I never called him a neuroscientist honey, but going to something little called medical school tends to make a big difference between people like you and the experts (optometrists, btw, must know a good deal about the brain, considering how the eyes are connected to them and all). Actually I assumed you were male because your hysterically filthy mouth matched perfectly those of stupid males who rained curses on me for speaking against porn. Irrational testasterone and estrogen sound the same, eh? After looking back on all this, it’s really more amusing to me than anything else; my long morning of working on blistered feet is preferable to dealing with numbskulls who know damn well what the truth is.

          • dance commander

            He’s an optometrist and he doesn’t know the first thing about fetal pain and neuroscience.

            I suggest you quit while you’re behind.

          • fiona64

            So, you think only guys can cuss?

            Fuck off, and stop clutching your pearls.

          • goatini

            Many of us have never terminated a pregnancy.

          • Arekushieru

            I haven’t. And what I quite often like to tell these antis is that I have probably engaged in fewer sexual encounters than they themselves have. Even if it’s one. Oops.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Get better shoes. No reason for having to work on blistered feet.

          • Arekushieru

            Irrational testosterone? So, let me guess, the reason you speak against porn is probably because it causes the silly little men to go apeshit and become slavering sex beasts. So, when the men rained curses down on you poor little you was surprised. See, the reason I speak out against porn is because I know it is based upon our CULTURE’S sexual dehumanizing of women. However, I don’t berate individual women for the choice to engage in porn. Because I don’t believe in ‘irrational estrogen’ like you do, either.

          • dance commander

            Lol Jennifer Starr just exposed your fuckwittery for all to see. Lolol

          • fiona64

            One woman who had an ectopic pregnancy ended gave birth to what was indeed a small baby;

            Citation needed.

          • dance commander

            fetal abnormalities are not reasons to end the baby’s life brutally

            Here is a fetal abnormality, you ignorant twit:

            http://library.med.utah.edu/WebPath/jpeg3/PERI096.jpg

            THE CONDITION IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH LIFE

            ALONG WITH OTHER FETAL ABNORMALITIES THAT COMMONLY LEAD TO ABORTION SUCH AS:

            NO HEART
            NO LUNGS
            NO ORGANS
            NO BRAIN

          • HeilMary1

            Pro-lie Jennifer would then whine about her tax money being stolen to keep that fetus alive after its forced-birth.

          • Lily_ZzTop

            Holy christ. I wish I’d never seen that!!!! I understand why you posted it, that’s totally fine, but damn! I think this is my first time ever seeing a misformed fetus.

            And now I can’t stop looking at it… pardon me for saying but ugh. Damn. I don’t mean to be insensitive but that head is all kinds of messed up… I will have to read the article. Makes me wonder what could have caused such a disastrously systemic deformation.

          • HeilMary1

            These defects happen far more than people realize.

          • dance commander

            It’s when the brain fails to develop and often isn’t detectable until 20 weeks along.

            Pro-lifers would have women carry such a fetus to term because it might magically be born normal and become a Nobel Prize winning supermodel by the age of 12.

          • goatini

            “ectopic pregnancies are generally done by simply inducing labor”

            BALONEY. Ectopic pregnancies *are not in the uterus”. There is NOT a way to “induce labor” on an ectopic pregnancy.

            But thank you SO much for so visibly demonstrating that you haven’t a clue what you are talking about.

          • Jennifer

            Calm down Goatini, the fact that you deny any children are unborn shows you’re educated but still ignore some facts. However, you’re correct, I was speaking of a friend who induced her labor in the belief she suffered from an ectopic pregnancy and, re-reading her article about such pregnancies, I was incorrect. However she spoke of ectopic pregnanices being ended, most of the time, with the babies whole.

          • goatini

            The only person ignoring, and to boot making up your own, facts, would be you, little girl.

          • dance commander

            She does sound about 12, doesn’t she?

          • goatini

            Must be on of those little forced-birther girls, all jacked up for the Advent version of “40 Days For Stalking, Harassment, And Vicious False Blaming And Shaming”. They now do it twice a year – once at Lent and once at Advent. Can’t stalk, harass, and falsely blame and shame innocent women exercising their rights just ONCE a year, you know!

          • HeilMary1

            She’s doing this for a Catechism class taught by a pedophile priest!

          • Jennifer Starr

            Oh yeah. She’s not simply naive, she’s painfully naive.

          • Jennifer

            Funny, that’s what people said when i was pro-choice. Maybe I have been listening to fuckwits on both sides way too much.

          • goatini

            You shouldn’t hang around with ignorant misogynist people who don’t like science, facts, civil rights, or females having personal bodily autonomy. Now we know you have no excuse, because (according to you) you knew better before you let yourself be brainwashed by people who think women are livestock.

          • Jennifer Starr

            I just think at some point you’ll find out that things in this world are never as simple and black and white as you might wish them to be.

          • fiona64

            Yep. I was an anti-choice dimwit just like her.

            And then I got out of high school.

          • dance commander

            Considering the fact that you just learned from us that partial birth abortion has been banned and that ectopic pregnancies cannot be birthed out of the vagina then yes I would say you’re a naive fucking idiot.

          • colleen

            well you certainly aren’t listening to the women here. All you’re doing is making an ass of yourself. Please go away.

          • fiona64

            Ah, ah, ah, Jenny; you said only men swear. Your language is not very lady-like. ::snort::

            What a joke you are.

          • Jennifer

            Wow, how pro-woman, to speak to an adult like that. You think what you want; if I put enough sand in your craws to make you two name-callers scream so much, that’s enough for me to leave with.

          • dance commander

            I insult you because you are incapable of carrying on a coherent, intellectually HONEST debate.

            All you do is lie and pretend that women are flocking to get abortions at 8 months because they love torturing babies to death.

            Seriously, you sound incredibly dumb, and idiots such as yourself help the pro-choice movement and just embarass your movement.

          • Jennifer

            LMAO Coming from the side who claims that fetuses can’t feel or sense. If our side was so ignorant, we couldn’t have succeeded in getting partial birth banned.

          • dance commander

            The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) releases two Working Party reports today: Fetal Awareness and Termination of Pregnancy for Fetal Abnormality.
            The first updates the previous report published in 1997, while the
            latter replaces the 1996 report. Both documents were commissioned by
            the Department of Health, following recommendations by the House of
            Commons Science and Technology Committee in 2008.

            A wide range of stakeholders including scientists, doctors, midwives
            and lay representatives were involved in producing these reports.
            Relevant international scientific studies published since the 1990s were
            considered by the respective working parties as was evidence submitted
            to the Science and Technology Committee. An online public consultation
            followed and the public were invited to submit their views. Both
            documents went through rigorous peer-review which included academics,
            ethicists and lawyers.

            To reflect new research findings and the advances in clinical
            practice, both original documents have been completely rewritten. These
            two new reports contain information for clinicians, researchers and
            healthcare professionals and the report on Fetal Awareness includes a
            new chapter with practical information and advice to women and parents.

            The main findings from each document are listed below.

            Fetal Awareness

            The fetus cannot feel pain before 24 weeks because the connections in the fetal brain are not fully formed

            Evidence examined by the Working Party showed that the fetus, while
            in the chemical environment of the womb, is in a state of induced sleep
            and is unconscious

            The Working Party concluded that because the 24 week-old fetus has
            no awareness nor can it feel pain, the use of analgesia is of no benefit

            More research is needed into the short and long-term effects of the use of fetal analgesia post-24 weeks.

            Termination of Pregnancy for Fetal Abnormality

            The Working Party concluded that it is unrealistic to produce a
            definitive list of conditions that constitute ‘serious’ handicap since
            accurate diagnostic techniques are as yet unavailable. Likewise, the
            consequences of abnormality are difficult to predict

            The Working Party recommends that the NHS Fetal Anomaly Screening
            Programme is centrally linked so that the outcome of pregnancies with
            specific congenital abnormalities are monitored over time.

            Appropriate information and support should be offered to all women undergoing antenatal screening

            In the case of a possible termination of pregnancy, all staff caring
            for the mother must adopt a non-directive, non-judgemental and
            supportive approach.

          • dance commander

            And your side only succeeded in getting partial birth banned because you morons LIED about fetal pain as you STILL LIE.

            And getting partial birth abortion banned didn’t change a thing, as late term fetii will STILL continue to be aborted if the woman’s life is in danger or if the fetus has a severe birth defect that is incompatible with life.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Yeah that was politics. Heavy on the emotional manipulation and light on the actual medical knowledge.

          • Jennifer

            The procedure’s pretty clear, thus no surprise why so many Dems and Repubs voted against it.

          • HeilMary1

            They’re cowardly stooges for pedophile priests. Why would you brag about that?

          • goatini

            And the little girl cares NOTHING about the negative impacts of the women-harming ban on intact D&E, on physicians and patients.

          • fiona64

            Well, dumbass, if your father is really a doctor, he is clearly not one who uses anesthesia for anything.

            How do I know that? Because anesthesia is *systemic.* When talking about late-term abortion (“partial-birth abortion” is a bullshit emotional term that has no basis in scientific reality), the fetus is anesthetized when the woman is. And those late-term abortions? Are on wanted pregnancies gone horribly, horribly wrong. Not that you care.

            Until so late in the pregnancy that abortion on demand is a moot point, feti lack the ability to experience pain because the myelin sheath is not complete until approximately 28 weeks’ gestation. And, just so you (and your “doctor” dad) know, response to noxious stimulus is not indicative of feeling pain. Pithed frogs in a biology class can respond to stimulus without feeling a damned thing.

          • colleen

            There are many kinds of doctors. Most of them don’t have medical degrees.

          • fiona64

            Well yes, that is true … but she did claim that her father had a medical background.

          • dance commander

            Her dad is an optometrist. J. Starr found it on her twitter feed.

          • Alex Harman

            You succeeded because there are an awful lot of ignorant politicians who swallowed your lies.

          • goatini

            Look, little girl, when you come to a website supporting reproductive justice and freedom, and protecting the civil, human and Constitutional rights of female US citizens – and screech your lying forced-birther nonsense, and attempt to catapult your deliberate deceptions and disinformation – YOU are attacking the civil rights, and the moral character, of your fellow citizens. YOU started it and now you are going to be a coward and run away. You’re not even interested in learning facts, science and truth about a safe and legal medical procedure that female US citizens have the Constitutional rights to avail themselves of.

          • dance commander

            She keeps flouncing, then sticks around for more!

          • colleen

            They so enjoy their martyrdom.

          • goatini

            PS, ALL you’ve posted is misogynistic ANTI-WOMAN nonsense.

          • dance commander
          • Jennifer

            Precisely. Ugh, graphic, but thank God it looks like they occured before too long.

          • dance commander

            Actually, you ignorant fool, ectopic pregnancies are ended with medication that DISSOLVES the embryo.

          • goatini

            It’s a fact that all children have already been born.

          • colleen

            the fact that you deny any children are unborn shows you’re educated but still ignore some facts.

            You seem unable to distinguish between a ‘fact’ and a ‘belief’.

          • fiona64

            Nope, no such thing as an unborn child.

            The stages of development are zygote, embryo, fetus, infant, child, adolescent, adult. Infancy and childhood require ::wait for it:: birth.

          • goatini

            Oh hey, “Jenny”, you downrated my FACTUAL post? Then DO TELL exactly how to “induce labor” on a pregnancy NOT EVEN IN THE UTERUS.

          • dance commander

            http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-m0i_VITD3bI/UQil9nD_84I/AAAAAAAAAIw/7mUQKqclLHY/s1600/ectopic.jpg

            This is what an ectopic pregnancy looks like, you ignorant sack of shit.

          • HeilMary1

            Catholic hospitals around the globe are now forcing women to die of untreated ectopic pregnancies.

          • Jennifer

            My God. I hope the law tears them up.

          • goatini

            The women? Yeah. we know you hope that.

          • HeilMary1

            Exactly! Fetal idolaters like Jennifer believe women deserve bloody fetal shredding of their lady parts just for having sex with their very own husbands. And that goes double for unmarriageable “sluts” like me.

          • HeilMary1

            Huh???

          • Jennifer Starr

            No. Ectopic pregnancies, which generally are in the fallopian tubes, can be treated if caught early with methotrexate, which will stop the growth and dissolve the remaining cells. Surgery is an option if the tube has ruptured or there is internal bleeding. You do not induce labor. Since the pregnancy is outside the uterus, it couldn’t come out that way. This is an example of why the only persons involved in making decisions about a risky pregnancy should be a woman and her doctor, not ‘pro-lifers’.

          • Jennifer

            Yes, as I said I was incorrect about the female friend I mentioned above; she had labor induced in a dangerous pregnancy, but it was not ectopic, and my memory was confused because the articles in which she mentioned this were about ectopic pregnancies. I’ve never supported forcing a woman to carry a doomed fetus, and you can see my comments supporting her and this belief in the comment secion of her articles; that should prove to reasonable people that I am not fucking stupid like the above morons, who blithely believe no un-sedated abortion or un-justified partial birth has ever occured, claim.

          • goatini

            NO unjustified safe, legal pregnancy termination HAS ever occurred. FACT. And each and every justification for safe, legal pregnancy termination is NONE of your business.

          • Jennifer Starr

            I never said that you were ‘stupid’. However, you are not a doctor and it’s obvious that you don’t possess a lot of medical knowledge. And for that matter, neither do the nutbags you meet in Crisis Pregnancy Centers or shouting at women outside of clinics. And yet, somehow, these people feel perfectly qualified to try and make medical decisions regarding other women’s pregnancy.

          • Jennifer

            I know you never said I’m stupid, but since you agreed with a comment that did, I wasn’t sure; thank you for keeping your position strong and civil. I may not have a ton of medical knowledge, but my opinions on both the necessities of ending dangerous pregnancies and the repulsive procedures that kill late-term babies (many of whom were no threats) have been formed over the years by people who do, many of whom changed their minds. I apologize if I got any of the facts wrong or fogged in relating what I’ve read here (like the type of pregnancy my friend had ended), but I can tell you this: I never, ever have supported forcing a woman to keep a doomed fetus that would doom her, and I have never supported keeping her from early termination either. Once it becomes a child though, a child with a brain, eyes, a heart, and limbs that can and have been torn by some horrible procedures, I can’t support destroying it; I have no choice there. If it ever comes to a choice between killing a child and letting the mother risk her life..God help her. I can’t tell her what to do and I don’t know what I’d do myself. This has been a hard topic for me since I was almost totally pro-choice, and it still is; no matter what, some will call me cold-hearted or an ignorant woman whether I’m trying to defend a woman’s right or a baby’s life. Comes with the territory. I have a lot of stress on my mind already tonight, so I may not return, but I’m glad to discuss it with you and a few others.

          • goatini

            You have not ONCE “(tried) to defend a woman’s right” in all of your vicious anti-woman nonsense. And since all babies, ever, have already been born, you’re doing ZERO to “defend… a baby’s life”.

          • Jennifer

            Yeah..including the babies left to die in IL because of a legal procedure that keeps doctors from saving them if they survive the abortion. I’ve already defended a woman’s right to early term abortions, ending dangerous pregnancies both here and elswhere. I’ll try to let this be your last ignorant comment to distract me.

          • Jennifer Starr

            There’s nothing that keeps doctors from saving.babies, and Jill Stanek is, quite frankly, full of it. She viciously attacked a woman and her husband who had to induce labor at 27 weeks for a pregnancy where the fetus had a rare defect called limb wall body complex, organs outside of the body, no kidneys, a hole in the heart and no amniotic fluid, because of the lack of kidneys. When their baby was born, he was covered in bruises from banging around the uterus. He died peacefully, finally out of pain, in his parents’ arms. Jill Stanek found this case and twisted the facts around to claim that the couple had killed their handicapped baby.

          • Jennifer

            I didn’t get this from her, she sounds awful. I’m referring to a new mandate in IL, which the president signed.

          • goatini

            There IS no “new mandate” in Illinois. You’re just parroting the lies of notorious perjurer Stanek.

            As a state senator, Obama saw BAIPA for what it was: an ideologically-motivated ploy to vilify women and doctors who choose abortion. On the state Senate floor on April 4, 2002, he explained, “This issue ultimately is about abortion and not live births. Because if there are children being born alive, I, at least, have confidence that a doctor who is in that room is going to make sure that they’re looked after.”

          • dance commander

            Citation needed. Moron.

          • goatini

            Yep, spreading the vicious deliberate deceptions of notorious perjurer Stanek, verbatim. You DO know she made it all up, don’t you?

            As a state senator, Obama saw BAIPA for what it was: an ideologically-motivated ploy to vilify women and doctors who choose abortion. On the state Senate floor on April 4, 2002, he explained, “This issue ultimately is about abortion and not live births. Because if there are children being born alive, I, at least, have confidence that a doctor who is in that room is going to make sure that they’re looked after.”

          • dance commander

            You have done nothing but lie. You are an ignorant sack of shit and I will treat you like one.

          • dance commander

            The fetus is sedated while in the uterus because of low oxygen content in the blood. Hypoxia . Until it takes its first breath it cannot feel a thing. Scientific fact.

          • Jennifer

            Wrong, shit-mouth. My father, who’s a doctor, just clarified this beyond any doubt; how do you think nervous systems develop if they can’t feel anything as long as they’re in the womb? You’ve proven, for the final time, you’re a fool and an ignorant moron who’s been screaming like the child you claim I am. The one legit thing I’ve seen you say is that partial birth is illegal, which is a victory for our side and proof pro-LIFE people know the science and the facts, including the hundreds of doctors who abandoned such practices.

          • goatini

            What kind of “doctor” controverts amply documented factual medical science? As if we believe you anyway. Maybe you should have consulted with “Dr Dad” before you told the whopper about “labor” being the cure for ectopic pregnancy.

          • dance commander

            1)

            The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) releases two Working Party reports today: Fetal Awareness and Termination of Pregnancy for Fetal Abnormality.
            The first updates the previous report published in 1997, while the
            latter replaces the 1996 report. Both documents were commissioned by
            the Department of Health, following recommendations by the House of
            Commons Science and Technology Committee in 2008.

            A wide range of stakeholders including scientists, doctors, midwives
            and lay representatives were involved in producing these reports.
            Relevant international scientific studies published since the 1990s were
            considered by the respective working parties as was evidence submitted
            to the Science and Technology Committee. An online public consultation
            followed and the public were invited to submit their views. Both
            documents went through rigorous peer-review which included academics,
            ethicists and lawyers.

            To reflect new research findings and the advances in clinical
            practice, both original documents have been completely rewritten. These
            two new reports contain information for clinicians, researchers and
            healthcare professionals and the report on Fetal Awareness includes a
            new chapter with practical information and advice to women and parents.

            The main findings from each document are listed below.

            Fetal Awareness

            The fetus cannot feel pain before 24 weeks because the connections in the fetal brain are not fully formed

            Evidence examined by the Working Party showed that the fetus, while
            in the chemical environment of the womb, is in a state of induced sleep
            and is unconscious

            The Working Party concluded that because the 24 week-old fetus has
            no awareness nor can it feel pain, the use of analgesia is of no benefit

            More research is needed into the short and long-term effects of the use of fetal analgesia post-24 weeks.

            Termination of Pregnancy for Fetal Abnormality

            The Working Party concluded that it is unrealistic to produce a
            definitive list of conditions that constitute ‘serious’ handicap since
            accurate diagnostic techniques are as yet unavailable. Likewise, the
            consequences of abnormality are difficult to predict

            The Working Party recommends that the NHS Fetal Anomaly Screening
            Programme is centrally linked so that the outcome of pregnancies with
            specific congenital abnormalities are monitored over time.

            Appropriate information and support should be offered to all women undergoing antenatal screening

            In the case of a possible termination of pregnancy, all staff caring
            for the mother must adopt a non-directive, non-judgemental and
            supportive approach.

            2) a post from cvg, who is a fucking NEUROSCIENTIST AND REGULAR POSTER HERE:

            A brain-dead person with a functioning heart/lungs/brain stem
            will still show electrical activity in the brain, but they won’t show the
            particular “brainwaves” that are characteristic of the higher
            cortical functions of cognition. So the whole EEG isn’t “flat”, just
            the part of the EEG profile that shows a thinking person is using that brain tissue.

            (A better description would be the more scientific exactitude of “clinical significant electrical brain activity” to avoid confusion.)

            At this point no “person” with sentience or awareness is present in
            the body, and it is legal to discontinue life support, and harvest organs for transplant, as without a functioning brain the body is just a collection of tissue.

            People who are diagnosed as clinically brain dead are routinely disconnected from life support and used to provide the organs for transplantations (no murder charges have ever been filled for this and none ever will be)
            A fetus does not have the bilaterally synchronous electroencephalographic patterns in the cortical area of the brain
            to be considered alive until 26-30 weeks of gestation, exactly like those who are diagnosed as clinically brain dead by physicians.

            People who are considered clinically brain-dead, have brainwaves (and sometimes even a beating heart), just not in the part of the brain that means that they are still alive.
            At this point doctors can start organ harvesting or turn off life support, no murder charges have ever, or will ever be been filed.

            A fetus younger then 26-30 weeks does not have all the brain structure (cortex) or the synapse, neurons etc in place to show more brain activity then a person who is clinically brain dead, as measured with the same machine (EEG)
            The heart might beat, but nobody is home.

            No embryo or fetus has ever been found to have “brain
            waves,” before 26-30 weeks gestation, although extensive EEG studies have been done on premature babies.

            In fact a fetus does not have a functional cortex before
            20-24 weeks gestation, no neurons, dendrites, and axons, with synapses between them are physically present.
            (Pretty hard to show activity in a structure that is not even present yet)

            Since these requirements are not present in the human cortex before 20-24 weeks of gestation, it is not possible to record the clinical significant electrical brain activity indicative of any form sentience and awareness prior to 20-24 weeks. (at that point the cerebral cortex can display some small intermittent non synchronous activity (“stutter”)
            This is not surprising since it is pretty hard to show activity in a brain structure that is not even present yet.

            Functional maturity of the cerebral cortex is suggested by fetal and neonatal electroencephalographic patterns, bilaterally synchronous
            electroencephalograpic are ONLY seen at a minimum of 26 to 29 weeks gestation.

            Studies used are;
            -Hamlin,H. (1964), “Life or Death by EEG,”Journal of the American
            Medical Association, October 12,113
            -J. Goldenring, “Development of the Fetal Brain,” New England Jour. of Med., Aug. 26, 1982, p. 564
            -K.J.S. Anand, a leading researcher on pain in newborns, and P.R. Hickey, published in NEJM

            So until the fetus has the same level of clinical brain activity
            (first seen at 26-29 weeks gestation, well after abortion becomes unavailable) as the woman in question, it is very dishonest (to say the least) to award the fetus more human rights then the woman.

          • dance commander

            My father, who’s a doctor, just clarified this beyond any doubt; how do
            you think nervous systems develop if they can’t feel anything as long as
            they’re in the womb?

            Is your fake father a proctologist? Because he sounds like he is as full of shit as you.

          • Jennifer Starr

            I had no idea that optometrists were also experts in obstetrics and gynecology. Oh wait, they’re not.

          • Jennifer

            Who said my father was an optometrist? They don’t have to be, Jennifer, they still go to medical school. What he said even supported the limited-knowledge “dance commander’s” statements in part, who quoted what appeared to be a medical statement saying that embryos don’t feel anything BEFORE 24 weeks. Nothing was said to disprove that later-term fetuses don’t, even on this limited site, feel pain during abortions and frankly, I’m amazed that some people’s argument relies entirely on whether the baby can feel; that hasn’t offered any comfort to doctors who have pulled apart babies, and it probably wouldn’t make anyone feel better to see a born child torn up or even just suffocated while under sedation.

          • dance commander

            I suggest you re- read all of the scientific literature that I have provided you with. I even pasted the info to you about 4or 5 times already. If you fail too read it I will simply ask everyone else here to spam your ignorant ass with it. You will not be permitted to ignore factual scientific evidence.

          • Jennifer

            LOL! You sound like a downright fascist now; you won’t permit me to do something? I have no reason to ignore it, especially when it disproves one of your own claims. But I guess you’ll never know whether I really pay attention to it and do with it as you demand, or keep spreading what I know to other people in real life, will you? Noo, your paranoid mind will just have to be tormented with it.

          • dance commander

            It did not disprove anything. The royal college of obgyns backed up my statement aaand the thing written by cjvg does not invalidate the rcog study. A 24week fetus is capable of sentience but only if it has been born. While in the oxygen deprived womb it cannot feel a thing.

          • Jennifer

            You keep seeming to miss that I’ve also been talking about fetuses after 24 weeks, and you said until it breathes its first it can’t feel a thing, which is untrue; at some point in that uterus, it feels, and you actually did not provide a link to the source of that article, if you want to nitpick. Also, there are the fetuses who survived abortion and are either pulled apart or left to die; the debate over what doctors do to them is what the law involving Obama had to do with.

          • dance commander
          • dance commander
          • dance commander

            Provided you with two links proving that the fetus is sedated while in the womb, dumbfuck + the report from the NGOC.

            Here is a fourth:

            http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19089-24week-fetuses-cannot-feel-pain.html#.UoJOduJGKHs

            ‘The report argues that pain responses may begin to develop only after a baby is born, and no longer sedated in the womb, and that this may explain why neonates experience pain differently to fetuses. “It is only after birth, with the separation of the baby from the uterus and the umbilical cord, that wakefulness truly begins,” it concludes.”

            http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10403496

            ‘The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists’ review said foetuses are “undeveloped and sedated”.”

            Even after 24 weeks, the college concluded a foetus is naturally sedated and unconscious in the womb.

            This could mean that late abortions, which are permitted for serious abnormalities or risks to the mother’s health, may not result in foetal suffering.

            In addition, the report says anaesthetics, which can be risky, would not be required if a foetus requires surgery.”

          • HeilMary1

            YOU keep ignoring what fetuses do to women and that no woman frivolously has $30,000 late term abortions!

          • goatini

            Says the fascist who wants to erase the civil, human and Constitutional rights of female US citizens. Projection – it’s what the forced birth propagandists do best.

          • Jennifer Starr

            It’s disqus, you don’t really log out. As for emailed comments, I can’t help you there. If you don’t want to read them you can simply press delete.

          • Jennifer

            Ohh yeah, Disqus. Well, thank you.

          • HeilMary1

            So your “better” solution is to saw women in half?

          • Lily_ZzTop

            You are probably a nice enough person, Jennifer, and you certainly have the right to feel as you wish. I kind of feel bad now for being such a hot head earlier. I was just so surprised to hear you say that you really believed that foolish myth about the body having “rape-protection”. Surely by now in your life you realize this not to be so?? Hey listen, I WISH it were so! Wouldn’t that be so much more justice for us women?? Well, that’s certainly how it SHOULD be; that’s nice if it WAS that way! Why should a female -ever- have to end up pregnant by some rapist scum, thus setting her up to give birth and become a full-time parent whether she was ready and able to or not?? Especially if she’s only in her early or mid-teens??? Outrageous, right?? Totally immoral, in my opinion!! My body SHOULD have some kind of uterine “seek and destroy” program set in motion to ALL invading sperm that makes it in without fucking permission!! Just like when T-cells seek out and destroy “invader” viruses within the bloodstream. Yes?? But unfortunately, there is no such program. I’m surprised this myth still even exists. I guess it’s all the power of wishful thinking. (But I’ll say this- If there is some kind of “god” out there, you’d best believe this is one such issue I’ll be demanding an answer to once I’m dead and in whatever world comes next! I want my answers. god dammit!)

            As far as late term abortions, everyone has a right to their own feelings and beliefs. You’re alright for feeling one way, and most of us another. But let’s just do our best to find out all the facts either way, ok? I am not the end all and be all expert on all of this, and you aren’t either. Like I said earlier, just try to keep in mind that a LOT of so-called “evidence” against “dangerous” late-term abortions has often been fabricated or greatly sensationalized. I’m sure there are always unfortunate, perhaps unpleasant freak exceptions… but we can’t treat those as the rule! And we can’t say, well, NO abortions EVER, because of a handful of freak mistakes or the very few cases where something went wrong, and a doctor has to make a spontaneous, unplanned decision.

            Situations like that, from all I have read, are virtually nil in today’s modern doctor’s offices and abortion clinics.

            Any doctor with a conscience and an ethical standard, will perform all abortions to the highest medical standard, in the most humane and least invasive way possible for that stage of pregnancy, under current law. And Based on what I have read here and elsewhere, previously legal so-called “partial birth” abortions would have fallen under this description. It does sound now, with them being no longer allowed, that in the very small number of terminations that happen this late, a much more invasive and involved procedure must now be used. To me that seems regrettable and exactly counter-intuitive to what the anti-PBA advocates were originally going for.

          • dance commander
          • HeilMary1

            So you’re anti-abortion after pretending mostly otherwise.

          • dance commander

            You were ‘incorrect’ because you’ve been lying all along and you try to cover your ass when we demonstrate what an ignorant fuckwit you are.

          • dance commander

            Reading comprehension isn’t your strong suit is it?

          • Jennifer Starr

            You know, I wasn’t going to say this before, but the internet is a wonderful thing. You have all these articles and all this knowledge right at your fingertips. And as much as I hate to use the phrase, ‘in my day’, I’m going to. Because in my day it was going to the library and going through books, magazines, newspaper articles and microfiche machines, which were tricky at the best of times. When I changed my views to pro-life to pro-choice one of the things I did was a lot of reading–of course, I read a lot anyway and adored research so it came naturally. But it was hard and took hours. Now you can google everything and news is right there at your fingertips, which makes your lack of knowledge on the subject of abortion, pregnancy and its risks puzzling. Have you actually read about this on your own or simply made up your mind based on pictures and what other people have told you? Perhaps you need to gain more knowledge on a subject before you give your opinion and then have to backtrack when proven wrong.

          • Jennifer

            So you’re an old lady huh, Jennifer? jk :P And yes, I have read on this on my own, but I will continue to do so. I’ve mainly had to backtrack because of conflicting reports or faulty memory, but I will look further into Carol Everett for one. When I was pro-choice, I knew next to nothing; I thought there was nothing to a pregnancy at about 2 or 3 months. It wasn’t until I read more that I changed my mind on some things; I’m 28, while I was 13 when I first heard of abortion, and all I heard was that it was taking out a fertilized egg. And in some types, it is; other times, it’s something that’s scarred women with regret. Thanks for the genuine discussion; I may look around and answer a couple more of your posts, but for the most part I’m closing the door for the night on this topic, and hopefully for good here; I have early job training tomorrow and can’t have more anxiety or stress on my mind.

          • dance commander

            You are one ignorant 28yr old. I pity you. To be so dumb…

          • Jennifer

            Yeah, like a dumbass who claimed he knew all, that babies don’t feel a thing before their first breath, then learned by an article he used for his own sources that whoops, it’s ony 24 WEEKS of the pregnancy where the babe can’t feel. Whoopsy-daisies..

          • dance commander

            Uhm, honey, I provided you with 4 links that demonstrated that fetii didn’t feel pain UNIL THEY ARE BORN BECAUSE THEY ARE SEDATED IN THE WOMB. NO, 5 LINKS.

            Because I am nice, I will re-paste them.

            1) http://www.rcog.org.uk/news/rcog-release-rcog-updates-its-guidance

            Evidence examined by the Working Party showed that the fetus, while in the chemical environment of the womb, is in a state of induced sleep and is unconscious

            2) Also in 2005, David Mellor and colleagues reviewed several lines of evidence that suggested a fetus does not awaken during its time in the womb. Mellor notes that much of the literature on fetal pain simply extrapolates from findings and research on premature babies. He questions the value of such data:

            Systematic studies of fetal neurological function suggest, however,
            that there are major differences in the in utero environment and fetal neural state that make it likely that this assumption is substantially incorrect.

            He and his team detected the presence of such chemicals as adenosine, pregnanolone, and prostaglandin-D2 in both human and animal fetuses, indicating that the fetus is both
            sedated and anesthetized in the womb. These chemicals are oxidized with the newborn’s first few breaths and washed out of the tissues, allowing consciousness to occur. If the fetus is asleep throughout gestation then the possibility of fetal pain is greatly minimized. “A fetus,” Mellor told The New York Times, “is not a baby who just hasn’t been born yet.”

            Mellor, DJ; Diesch, TJ; Gunn, AJ; Bennet, L (2005). “The importance of ‘awareness’ for understanding fetal pain”. Brain research. Brain research reviews 49 (3): 455–71. doi:10.1016/j.brainresrev.2005.01.006. PMID 16269314.

            3) There is also discussion among researchers about how pain is perceived over-all. Some researchers believe that because pain can involve sensory, emotional and cognitive factors, pain may not be sensed until after birth. Other researchers argue that pain is felt during the second trimester of pregnancy. Direct fetal analgesia is used in only a minority of prenatal surgeries.

            Johnson, Martin and Everitt, Barry. Essential reproduction

            4) The report argues that pain responses may begin to develop only after a baby is born, and no longer sedated in the womb, and that this may explain why neonates experience pain differently to fetuses. “It is only after birth, with the separation of the baby from the uterus and the umbilical cord, that wakefulness truly begins,” it concludes.

            http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19089-24week-fetuses-cannot-feel-pain.html#.UoKzAuJGKHs

            5) Pain perception requires conscious recognition or awareness of a noxious stimulus. Neither withdrawal reflexes nor hormonal stress responses to invasive procedures prove the existence of fetal pain, because they can be elicited
            by nonpainful stimuli and occur without conscious cortical processing. Fetal awareness of noxious stimuli requires functional thalamocortical connections. Thalamocortical fibers begin appearing between 23 to 30 weeks’ gestational
            age, while electroencephalography suggests the capacity for functional pain perception in preterm neonates probably does not exist before 29 or 30 weeks

            http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=201429

            6) http://www.nature.com/pr/journal/v65/n3/abs/pr200950a.html

            Furthermore, the fetus is almost continuously asleep and unconscious partially due to endogenous sedation

            ————–

            Six references dumbass. FETII DO NOT FEEL PAIN BECAUSE THEY ARE SEDATED WHILE IN THE WOMB. THEY ARE UNCONSCIOUS AND THE NECESSARY CONNECTIONS NEEDED TO *PERCEIVE* PAIN ARE NOT ‘HOOKED UP’ UNTIL 30 WEEKS GESTATION, AT WHICH POINT A WOMAN WILL NOT BE HAVING AN ‘ABORTION OF CONVENIENCE’

            So kindly shut the fuck up. I have proven you to be wrong wrong wrong.

          • L-dan

            I always appreciate these enormous threads, even if the shouting at clueless trolls gets tiresome, because I always learn a new tidbit or two. Some of these links are new to me, so I appreciate you posting them.

          • fiona64

            If she’s more than 18 years old (and actually female), I’d be shocked.

          • goatini

            The “actually female” part is the one I’ve been questioning since day 1 on this article. I’m thinking that any female who’s learned “the facts of life” would KNOW that “labor” has ZERO to do with an ectopic pregnancy.

          • colleen

            “When I was pro-choice, I knew next to nothing”

            sadly, you know next to nothing now too. I see a pattern here.

          • expect_resistance

            While we don’t agree, I wish you the best with your job training tomorrow. I understand way too much about job loss, job insecurity, and anxiety.

          • dance commander

            Just wait. She will find herself jobless and pregnant and then get an abortion because ‘my abortion is the only moral abortion’

            http://mypage.direct.ca/w/writer/anti-tales.html

          • dance commander

            Jenny is a regular poster at lie site news.

          • goatini

            What a surprise, not. Just another vicious forced-birth propagandist of deliberately deceptive disinformation.

          • expect_resistance

            Thanks’s for the warning.

          • expect_resistance

            I love research too :) I love the amount of research you can do on Google and free e-books. But, there is a lot of crap online. RH has many great resources that have been researched and are credible. I would recommend to Jennifer (and any anti-choicers) check these resources.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Very, very true :) Thank you for this :)

          • expect_resistance

            Ectopic pregnancies can kill women. It’s really dangerous to spread lies, to tell women they can continue an ectopic pregnancy. A good friend of mine was trying desperately to have a child with her husband. She found out her pregnancy was an ectopic pregnancy. It would have killed her to continue her pregnancy.

            Do not tell women they can continue an ectopic pregnancy. It could kill them.

          • goatini

            It is not up to you to judge as to whether ANY woman’s reason for availing herself of her civil, human and Constitutional rights is “trivial”.

          • Ineedacoffee

            Get f*cked its not
            A friends sister recently had to abort at 20 weeks, the baby wouldnt have survived more than 24 hours IF she was born alive, that entire time would be on a life support machine.
            Her mum chose to end now as its kinder to her, her partner and the child she is now grieving.
            By your screwed logic, she should have gone to term, had a still born or near death baby just cos they didnt know of the problems in first few weeks

          • Erin Frances

            I am that choice. I was born in a post roe v. wade world. I was conceived at an inconvenient time. My parents were 15 and 19. My mother was told by many, even her family, to take care of it. How can a baby raise a baby? My mother should have been the textbook pro-choice scencario.
            Against all odds she gave birth to me. My father stuck around to support us. No college and no career but they made it work. They made it work because their baby was worth the struggle to overcome the obstacles. I’m sure my mother was scared. I am sure that not having me would have been easier. I am so grateful that she made the difficult choice. Thank you.
            Anyone who sees my posts knows that I am pro-life. This is not anti-woman. This is not a religious decision. This to me is life or death. My life or my death.

          • goatini

            Your post is INDEED anti-woman. This is about CHOICE. Your mother had a CHOICE, and we will make sure that ALL female US citizens continue to have a CHOICE.

          • Jennifer Starr

            No, sweetie. The facts of your birth and the choice that your mother made does not give you some kind of special insight or authority regarding other women’s pregnancies. Despite your existential crisis, it really isn’t all about you.

          • dance commander

            You sound incredibly selfish to me

          • dance commander

            Selfish would be denying me the right to live in order to make someone
            else’s life easier. That would be selfish. Wanting to live makes me
            human. Tell a cancer patient that they are selfish for wanting to live.
            I wonder what your response would be.

            Selfish is forcing another to put life and limb on the line so that you can live.

            YOUR MOM IS A PERSON, NOT A SLAVE

            Selfish is forcing another person to undergo all of the below for a microscopic cell that is smaller than the period at the end of this sentence:

            Normal, frequent or expectable temporary side effects of pregnancy:

            exhaustion (weariness common from first weeks)

            altered appetite and senses of taste and smell

            nausea and vomiting (50% of women, first trimester)

            heartburn and indigestion

            constipation

            weight gain

            dizziness and light-headedness

            bloating, swelling, fluid retention

            hemmorhoids

            abdominal cramps

            yeast infections

            congested, bloody nose

            acne and mild skin disorders

            skin discoloration (chloasma, face and abdomen)

            mild to severe backache and strain

            increased headaches

            difficulty sleeping, and discomfort while sleeping

            increased urination and incontinence

            bleeding gums

            pica

            breast pain and discharge

            swelling of joints, leg cramps, joint pain

            difficulty sitting, standing in later pregnancy

            inability to take regular medications

            shortness of breath

            higher blood pressure

            hair loss

            tendency to anemia

            curtailment of ability to participate in some sports and activities

            infection including from serious and potentially fatal disease

            (pregnant women are immune suppressed compared with non-pregnant women,
            and are more susceptible to fungal and certain other diseases)

            extreme pain on delivery

            hormonal mood changes, including normal post-partum depression

            continued
            post-partum exhaustion and recovery period (exacerbated if a c-section —
            major surgery — is required, sometimes taking up to a full year to
            fully recover)

            Normal, expectable, or frequent PERMANENT side effects of pregnancy:

            stretch marks (worse in younger women)

            loose skin

            permanent weight gain or redistribution

            abdominal and vaginal muscle weakness

            pelvic
            floor disorder (occurring in as many as 35% of middle-aged former
            child-bearers and 50% of elderly former child-bearers, associated with
            urinary and rectal incontinence, discomfort and reduced quality of life —
            aka prolapsed utuerus, the malady sometimes badly fixed by the
            transvaginal mesh)

            changes to breasts

            varicose veins

            scarring from episiotomy or c-section

            other
            permanent aesthetic changes to the body (all of these are downplayed by
            women, because the culture values youth and beauty)

            increased proclivity for hemmorhoids

            loss of dental and bone calcium (cavities and osteoporosis)

            higher lifetime risk of developing Altzheimer’s

            newer
            research indicates microchimeric cells, other bi-directional exchanges
            of DNA, chromosomes, and other bodily material between fetus and mother
            (including with “unrelated” gestational surrogates)

            Occasional complications and side effects:

            complications of episiotomy

            spousal/partner abuse

            hyperemesis gravidarum

            temporary and permanent injury to back

            severe scarring requiring later surgery

            (especially after additional pregnancies)

            dropped
            (prolapsed) uterus (especially after additional pregnancies, and other
            pelvic floor weaknesses — 11% of women, including cystocele, rectocele,
            and enterocele)

            pre-eclampsia
            (edema and hypertension, the most common complication of pregnancy,
            associated with eclampsia, and affecting 7 – 10% of pregnancies)

            eclampsia (convulsions, coma during pregnancy or labor, high risk of death)

            gestational diabetes

            placenta previa

            anemia (which can be life-threatening)

            thrombocytopenic purpura

            severe cramping

            embolism (blood clots)

            medical
            disability requiring full bed rest (frequently ordered during part of
            many pregnancies varying from days to months for health of either mother
            or baby)

            diastasis recti, also torn abdominal muscles

            mitral valve stenosis (most common cardiac complication)

            serious infection and disease (e.g. increased risk of tuberculosis)

            hormonal imbalance

            ectopic pregnancy (risk of death)

            broken bones (ribcage, “tail bone”)

            hemorrhage and

            numerous other complications of delivery

            refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease

            aggravation
            of pre-pregnancy diseases and conditions (e.g. epilepsy is present in
            .5% of pregnant women, and the pregnancy alters drug metabolism and
            treatment prospects all the while it increases the number and frequency
            of seizures)

            severe post-partum depression and psychosis

            research
            now indicates a possible link between ovarian cancer and female
            fertility treatments, including “egg harvesting” from infertile women
            and donors

            research
            also now indicates correlations between lower breast cancer survival
            rates and proximity in time to onset of cancer of last pregnancy

            research also indicates a correlation between having six or more pregnancies and a risk of coronary and cardiovascular disease

            Less common (but serious) complications:

            peripartum cardiomyopathy

            cardiopulmonary arrest

            magnesium toxicity

            severe hypoxemia/acidosis

            massive embolism

            increased intracranial pressure, brainstem infarction

            molar pregnancy, gestational trophoblastic disease

            (like a pregnancy-induced cancer)

            malignant arrhythmia

            circulatory collapse

            placental abruption

            obstetric fistula

            More permanent side effects:

            future infertility

            permanent disability

            death.

          • L-dan

            I need to save that list

          • expect_resistance

            Well said! Bravo!

          • expect_resistance

            Well said! Bravo!

          • colleen

            Your 15 year old mother was raped and exploited. How wonderful for you.

          • colleen

            I loathe the ‘pro-lifers’ who use their raped mothers as evidence that we should allow the religious right to impose their beliefs on all women.

            Your mother’s destroyed life is not something a decent self respecting woman wants for her daughter. A 15 year old belongs in school. Really most women have more intelligence and self respect than to want to emulate the Sarah Palin and her family.

          • L-dan

            That was her choice. And I’m glad you realize that it was a lot of work and sacrifice for her, and are grateful for it.

            But

            If she had chosen differently, you would never be here to care.

            It’s pretty selfish to want her to have been forced to risk her life, health, and future to bring you into existence. That task is, and should be, a volunteer duty only.

          • Jennifer Starr

            I once had a discussion with a ‘pro-life’ male who told me how his mother had nearly died bringing him into this world. When I asked him whether he was grateful that she’d gone through all of that for him, his response was basically ‘Why should I be grateful? She was only doing her job.’

          • L-dan

            That’s like saying “pfft, Veteran’s Day. They were only doing their job.”

          • dance commander

            Of course they do.

            Because using another person’s body for your own ‘gain’ is selfish. Instead of appreciating what women do, and admitting that your ‘right to life’ is in fact rather self-serving, it is easier to just erase the woman and pretend that it’s her JOB, and that you were ENTITLED to her labour on your behalf.

            If it is her job – if it is what she was ‘made for’ – then you owe her nothing.

          • HeilMary1

            You’ve described the slave master mentality!

          • Lily_ZzTop

            What a disgusting pig. Here’s hoping he dies bloody, and soon. What a waste of skin.

            Terribly sad that so many people, men, and apparently a lot of women, still feel this way. Even if it was her “job” as these worthless cock-suckers say, it’s borderline SOCIOPATHIC not to recognize that it STILL took an extraordinary amount of work, emotional resilience, and SACRIFICE to do such a thing, especially in her case!!!!!! As if risky pregnancies are nothing more onerous than a breezy stroll through the park!!

            Must be nice to waltz through the world, under the rancid assumption that you owe absolutely *******NOTHING******** to the other 50% that make your entire labor-free, period-free, birth-free, rape victim-free (well, mostly), existence in every way POSSIBLE!!!! What a truly breath-taking way to be, honestly!!

            I’m afraid I see domestic violence in his future… sadly, he probably won’t be the victim.

            THIS SENSE OF ENTITLEMENT TO ME, IS UTTERLY ASTOUNDING. Even if I was a man, I could NEVER feel this way!!! NEVER, AS IN EVER, FUCKING EVER, NEVER! I could never be so cold-blooded and cavalier as if I fucking DESERVED THIS,……DESERVED, SIMPLY FOR BEING THE WORTHLESS SACK OF SHIT THAT I AM (well, that this piece of filth is), JUST FOR EXISTING!!!!!!!

            SOME HUMANS MAKE ME WANT TO COMMIT WHOLESALE MURDER… sorry people, not nuts here… just really enraged when I encounter such SOCIOPATHY and dehumanization of yet another segment of our society, especially anything gender-based. I couldn’t be prouder to be a female and I couldn’t be PROUDER of the female race. So when I encounter such blatant misogyny, I see red. I see fucking RED. I can’t fathom it, and I can’t fathom why it’s been such a virulent INFECTION on this sorry rock for as long as it has. Can NOT FATHOM IT. Not as a woman, not as if I were a man. I can believe it, oh yes, but to really understand it, to this day, I can NOT. Or maybe I just refuse.

            Maybe he’s not such a bad guy, once you get to know him… but if that’s the first thing that he shot out of his waste-of-flesh fudgepack-hole of a mouth, then…. that’s pretty telling.

            I’d get such divine pleasure out of running over such a person with my ATV or truck.. wait.. no BOTH! Why should I deny the pleasure to either of my buddies?? : P

            A pox be on that pig, forevermore.

          • dance commander

            I have been through all of those symptoms and more. I have carried a
            child to term. I have carried a child to term with extreme
            complications. Being on bed rest for 4.5 months and spending ago of part
            or my last month in the hospital. My blood pressure was so high that my
            husband was worried I would not make it. So I have made a choice to
            prevent future pregnancies. That should be the choice not killing babies
            that exist.

            You had a CHOICE. Yet you would, through threat of law, that other women either die or become permanently disabled because you only care about fetuses.

            You are not pro-life. You’re pro forced childbirth and pro-suffering of women ie broodmares.

          • expect_resistance

            My mom could have died being pregnant with me. I would have been fine with her having an abortion. She didn’t find out how risky being pregnant was until she gave birth to me. She almost died in the hospital from her heart condition that was aggravated from being pregnant.

          • expect_resistance

            My mom could have died being pregnant with me. I would have been fine with her having an abortion. She didn’t find out how risky being pregnant was until she gave birth to me. She almost died in the hospital from her heart condition that was aggravated from being pregnant.

          • dance commander

            Should women who are raped give birth?

            Would it be selfish of them to ‘make the choice to deny life to their rape baby’?

            Does a rape baby’s right to life override a woman’s right not to be raped or be pregnant from rape?

          • dance commander

            Should women who are raped give birth?

            Would it be selfish of them to ‘make the choice to deny life to their rape baby’?

            Does a rape baby’s right to life override a woman’s right not to be raped or be pregnant from rape?

          • HeilMary1

            I wish my abusive mom aborted me instead. My life is hell.

          • Lily_ZzTop

            Damn HeilMary, I am so sorry to hear that! It must have been way off the rails, for you to feel this way. I hate to hear that for any person. I deeply abhor hearing these kinds of things, about anyone! I always wish there was something I could do to change that reality for someone.

            Some people should simply never, EVER be parents!! They either lack the heart, or they lack the will, or they lack the soul, or they lack the ability to perform, and can’t or won’t go find a way to get it, or they are simply BAT SHIT F(U)CKING CRAZY. Sadly, the latter is often true. However, mental illness can often be controlled or helped by medication. The person suffering from it however, HAS TO FUCKING TAKE IT, and some of these sick, sad f(u)cks just wont! (I have a little bit of experience here, not with myself but of being close to and trying to be a caregiver to two severely mentally ill individuals who were ignorant and arrogant enough to stalwartly believe they did not, nor would they ever, need medication. It’s so beyond atrociously enraging, I can’t even describe…but a story for another time..)

            Just because their body is capable of procreating, doesn’t mean it should happen. And this goes for non-biological parents as well. Not all adoptive or step-parents are good. (Of course, we all know the foster care horror stories). There is an outrageously phenomenal number of people in the world that either through sheer moral depravity, or mental illness, have traumatized their children beyond belief. Some of them will be able to find hope and healing, and sadly, some won’t, and will end up either taking their own lives, or falling into tragic, dysfunctional and/or abusive patterns of their own.

            The cruelty and sadism, or simple neglect, of some people really is shocking. It is so terribly unfortunate.

          • Lily_ZzTop

            GOOD FOR F(UC)KING YOU!!!!!!! JESUS!! AND?!?!?!?!

            AND!!!!!!!!!! ?

            JESUS CHRIST!! GOOD FOR YOUR PARENTS, THEY ARE HEROES OF THE UNIVERSE!! ONCE AGAIN, HERE COMETH *ONE* PERSON, GIVING *ONE* STORY, THAT THEY IGNORANTLY, AND INSUFFERABLY *ARROGANTLY* FEEL GIVES THEM THE MORAL PREROGATIVE TO *RULE* OVER ALL *OTHER* WOMEN’S CHOICES IN BIRTH AND REPRODUCTION IN THE **ENTIRE** UNITED STATES!!!!!!!!!!!!!

            YOUR *SINGLE* ANECDOTE, AS INSPIRING AS IT MAY SOUND TO *YOU*, (AND IT’S NOT QUITE AS INSPIRING TO THE REST OF US, I THINK AS MUCH AS YOU MAY LIKE IT TO BE; ALTHOUGH I DO CONGRATULATE YOUR PARENTS FOR PUSHING THROUGH A CHALLENGING SITUATION TOGETHER, NO DOUBT IT MUST HAVE BEEN VERY DIFFICULT AT TIMES) IS SO UTTERLY COMPLETELY *WORTHLESS* AS A POINT TO BE USED IN THE JUSTIFICATION, THAT IT FALLS INTO THE REALM OF FARCE!!

            AGAIN, AMAZING HOW EVERYONE AGAINST PRO-CHOICE CAN *NEVER* ARGUE THE ISSUE ON ITS LOGICAL MERITS, THEY MUST *ALWAYS* DEVOLVE IN POINTLESS AND CIRCULAR MEANINGLESS EMOTIONAL APPEALS!!!!! (WORKS GREAT WHEN YOU HAVE A LOW-INFORMATION, UTTERLY LOGICALLY-INCOMPETENT AUDIENCE YOU’RE SPEAKING TO AND TRYING TO INFLUENCE, AS FAUX NEWS KNOWS SO VERY WELL!!!)

            SHOULD I STOP NOW, OR ARE YOU CAPABLE OF READING AND UNDERSTANDING LOGIC??

            PERHAPS I SHOULD ASK FIRST, SO EXACTLY WHAT ARE YOU REALLY TRYING TO SAY? ARE YOU PRO-LIFE FOR YOURSELF, BUT BELIEVE THAT OTHER WOMEN, YOU KNOW, THE *OTHER* -100 MILLION- OUT THERE IN THE UNITED STATES THAT *AREN’T* CARBON COPIES OF YOU, HAVE A RIGHT TO MAKE THE DECISION FOR THEMSELVES??

            BECAUSE IF SO, THEN I SUPPOSE WE ARE AT THE RIGHT POINT OF DIALOGUE. YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO SEE THINGS YOUR WAY, WE -ALL- DO, THAT’S WHAT THIS DEBATE IS GODDAMN ALL ABOUT. BUT IF YOU RECOGNIZE THAT YOU *DON’T* HAVE THE RIGHT TO IMPOSE BY FORCE, YOUR *OPINION* ON THIS MOST INTIMATE AND SIGNIFICANT OF DECISIONS ON -OTHER- WOMEN (SEEING AS HOW, YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE THEIR PESKY INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AND ALL!), THAN I SAY “GOOD FOR YOU”, AND HAVE A NICE NIGHT…..WE HAVE NO DISAGREEMENT IN SUCH CASE.

            *** IF ***, HOWEVER, YOU PRECIOUSLY FEEL THAT YOU *DARE* HAVE THE RIGHT TO IMPOSE YOUR PARTICULAR WORLD VIEW SHAPED BY YOUR *ONE* UNIQUE EXPERIENCE, ON *MILLIONS* OF OTHER WOMEN OF CHILD-BREAING AGE, BOTH IN THE PRESENT AND IN THE FUTURE, JUST BECAUSE *YOU* WERE LUCKY ENOUGH THAT *YOUR* UNPLANNED PREGNANCY SITUATION (in your case, you being that pregnancy), THROUGH THE WILL OF GOD, SOME LUCKY STARS, OR SOME OTHER FACTOR ACTUALLY WORKED OUT FOR THE POSITIVE; THEN HOUSTON,

            WE HAVE A GODDAMN FUCKING PROBLEM.

          • dance commander

            No Lily, the world should be fucking grateful that Erin exists to grace it with her presence.

          • Lily_ZzTop

            Look, if you’re family made it through all that happy and healthy, and everyone is happy and healthy now, wunderbar. Really. That’s great that in your ONE case, everything turned out roses. And if your mom really doesn’t have any regrets about anything, not even the timing of the birth so early in her life (note I am -not- saying, that she didn’t wish she had you), than more power to her.

            None of that has any bearing whatsoever on whether or not OTHER women should not be provided with the option of humanely ending a pregnancy, ideally in the first two trimesters, should she so desire or due to the existence of serious complications. So, look.. no offense, even though I was frustrated earlier, but your anecdote is really meaningless in the wider debate of why ALL women deserve safe, open, and unfettered access to safe, humane abortion services.

            You have your opinion and feeling on the matter, by all means, do as you wish. No one is telling you otherwise.

            But don’t you think it’s the height of selfishness to DEMAND that all OTHER women that AREN’T you be forced to carry every pregnancy to term?? Who are you to make such a wild, blanket judgement?? You don’t see that as being at all unfair, greatly insensitive to all those suddenly thrust into a completely life-changing position, or of violating their basic rights?? My goodness, I should think that deciding whether or not to become a full-time mother and change my life forever should be something that I possess the right to make a decision on!

            Now some might say, well if they didn’t want to get pregnant, whey didn’t they use birth control, and the fact is, that no BC method is perfect, many people faithfully use their BC method of choice and STILL end up pregnant each year. Some women get raped. It’s pretty unfortunate, but it’s true. Some young women have been told ridiculous ignorance like “you can’t get pregnant if it’s the first time”. Some women have a hard time obtaining birth control, for many reasons. Teenagers, not exactly renowned for calmly and rationally stepping back and thinking through each and every decision, get carried away on their hormones and then, oops!!!

            Just because birth control exists, doesn’t mean that now magically there will never be another unintended pregnancy!

          • fiona64

            Things like ectopic pregnancies are generally done by simply inducing labor;

            WTF? No. Just … no.

            Ectopic pregnancies are, by definition, non-viable.

            You are an idiot.

          • HeilMary1

            Fallopian tube-stuck embryos can’t be induced into labor because they never make it into the uterus. Jennifer has some twisted anatomy diagrams in her head.

        • Lily_ZzTop

          Perfectly said, L-dan, but here we are in 20-FUCKING-13!!! And YET! some people, some ignorant, filth-ridden, flea-bag SCUM (all of whom suffer from that sad, hopelessly terminal, very late-stage Empty Cranium Disease) are STILL advocating AGAINST the universal availability of free and low-cost CONTRACEPTION!!! Not just abortions, but CONTRACEPTION! (and NATURALLY god-forbid we actually EDUCATE young people on how their bodies actually WORK so they can actually make some informed decisions!!!)

          Darn me for being so forgetful, but I coulda done sworn we fought this fight starting 100 years ago with Margaret Sanger, and concluded it, for all intents and purposes, in the 1960′s when the Pill was finally introduced!

          And yet some of these IGNORANT hate-spewing wastes of flesh, both inside and outside Congress continue to splutter and gag and make with much wailing and gnashing of teeth against the right of women to have this access if they so desire!!!

          It’s just breathtaking sometimes, isn’t it???!?!

      • dance commander

        So is heart surgery. I suppose you oppose that too?

        And I suppose you oppose birth, because it’s also disgusting?

        And I suppose you oppose abortion to save the life of the mother, because that is also gross?

        • Jennifer

          If you’re really comparing a horrific procedure used to kill a baby to life-saving surgery or what’s natural and necessary for the survival of a species, as far as I’m concerned you’re as good as insane.

          • L-dan

            No. If you’re arguing that a procedure should be banned because it is disgusting or painful, it’s fair to compare it to other procedures that are disgusting or painful.

            You seem to think that heart surgery is necessary, but abortion is not. You seem to think that the pain and grossness of childbirth is necessary, but abortion is not? Sure childbirth is needed to perpetuate the species, but it’s not necessary that everyone chose to have children. I’m quite happy leaving the determination of when abortion is necessary up to the person who is pregnant.

            I’m willing to allow that there might be a few I’d have moral qualms about. But I also think that the pain and suffering that it would cause actual, feeling, thinking pregnant people to jump through hoops designed to block those few would far outweigh any benefit of blocking those few from happening. In my reckoning, it is more immoral to put those roadblocks in front of the larger number needed such services.

          • dance commander

            What L-dan said.

            Logic isn’t your strong suit, is it?

          • goatini

            No babies are ever harmed in any way in a safe, legal pregnancy termination, because all babies, ever, have already been born.

            And since the vast majority of safe, legal pregnancy terminations occur in the first trimester, you have NOTHING to complain about. ALL late-term safe, legal pregnancy termination (a very, very tiny percentage of all safe, legal pregnancy terminations) are for either (1) heartbreaking, tragic fetal and/or maternal diagnoses that I would not wish even upon the most vicious forced-birther; or (2) the truly “hard cases” that, again, I would not wish even upon the most vicious forced-birther.

            You need to stop blathering all of this vile nonsense that, at its core, is ALL about attempting to erase the civil, human and Constitutional rights of female US citizens.

          • dance commander

            She is arguing against 8 month abortions because women do it for convenience or to kill their DS ‘baby’ at 8 months

            lulz

          • Cactus_Wren

            She is arguing against 8 month abortions because women do it for convenience or to kill their DS ‘baby’ at 8 months

            Because just every week of the year, somewhere in America, a woman seven and a half months pregnant — happily pregnant, eagerly looking forward to having a child — comes home from a day of excited shopping for nursery furniture and layette sets, finds an invitation in her mailbox, and wails, “Oh noez! This party is next week! How will I ever fit into a sexy dress? I’d better get my doctor to give me one of those partial-birth thingies!”

            And Jennifer will genuinely wonder why I accuse her of despising women.

          • Jennifer

            ALL of them, huh? You can prove that can you? I’ve seen pictures of both early-term and late-term abortions, as well as articles from people who killed late-term children because they had disorders that didn’t compare with lacking major organs, ectopic pregnancies or anything that would result in a dead baby. Your sweeping generalizations don’t erase the accounts I’ve read either detailing the difference between early and late abortions, or testimonies from people who actually used to perform or went through these terrors. Maybe you should try listening to the women who had un-sedated abortions, could feel their children thrashing around or being stabbed; I’m SURE those women are totally against all members of their own sex. I’m done, so you’ll have to battle other members of the “war on women”.

          • dance commander

            as well as articles from people who killed late-term children because
            they had disorders that didn’t compare with lacking major organs,
            ectopic pregnancies or anything that would result in a dead baby.

            PROVE IT.

            91% of abortions are before 13 weeks
            61% are before 9 weeks
            1.5% are before 24 weeks

            abortions after 24 weeks = illegal, unless the life of the mother is at stake or the fetus is dead/dying

            so fucking prove that women abort at 8 months for reasons of convenience or down syndrome or kindly SHUT THE FUCK UP

          • goatini

            Again, ALL safe, legal late term pregnancy terminations are for ONLY one of two reasons: (1) heartbreaking, tragic fetal and/or maternal diagnoses that I would not wish even upon the most vicious forced-birther; or (2) the truly “hard cases” that, again, I would not wish even upon the most vicious forced-birther.

            False anecdotes and falsified “pictures” prove nothing except the bald-faced desperation of those who wish to erase the civil, human and Constitutional rights of female US citizens.

          • HeilMary1

            Those mentally ill liars are brainwashed by pedophile priests.

          • Lily_ZzTop

            You’ve seen and been fed a lot of falsified information. The anti-choice movement has deep, deep pockets, and creates tons of propaganda each and every year to prey on people’s most basic emotions of empathy and disgust.

          • HeilMary1

            Maybe Goddess will bless you with stinky divorce-causing obstetric incontinence that has ruined billions of women throughout history. That will give you a clue why so many men cheat on and dump their brood mares.

      • HeilMary1

        Google obstetric fistulas to get a clue why the Vatican denounced priests’ wives as “piles of dung”.

        • colleen

          In all fairness I’m pretty sure that the men at the Vatican regard all women as piles of dung

  • L-dan

    Have you ever had cognitive dissonance when reading about people scarred or dead from pregnancy? Those traumatized by giving birth to children forced upon them by rape?

    Do you actually believe that most of those having abortions are only doing so because a heartless medical establishment lies to them about…I’m not really sure what they’re lying to them about in your fantasy there, actually.

    Do you actually believe that 1. those who have abortions (1/3 of all women) are heartless and 2. that many have murdered actual children as well? Because when you’re looking at 1/3 of the women in the country, ‘many’ would imply an epidemic of infanticide that I think would have made the news at some point.

    • Jennifer

      Why would I have cognitive dissonance about people dying from pregnancy? That’s a tragedy that’s happened for centuries, and is usually only defined as anything close to crime if a woman was refused medical care. My “fantasy”, lol, has to do with accounts I’ve heard, and one lie would be whether there are viable organs in a baby, what the procedure actually entails, when the heart beats or even how much pain could be expected.

      • L-dan

        Women dying of abortions has also happened for centuries. Why argue against abortion but not against carrying a pregnancy to term when both can result in pain and death?

        Also: Do you actually believe that 1. those who have abortions (1/3 of all
        women) are heartless and 2. that many have murdered actual children as
        well? Because when you’re looking at 1/3 of the women in the country,
        ‘many’ would imply an epidemic of infanticide that I think would have
        made the news at some point.

      • dance commander

        Do you think that women who abort at any stage are cold blooded murderers and how much jail time should they do for their crimes?

        • Jennifer

          This is probably my last response to you, but since it’s a direct and just question, I’ll answer. No, I’ve said elsewhere that I don’t think abortion at ANY stage is a murder. I support early abortions, after-morning pills and chemical abortions by pills at early stages. But things like partial birth and D&E are horrific procedures that many doctors, nurses and even pro-choice champions have turned against. What a woman getting such an aborton would “deserve” as punishment would be hard to say if it was even up to me; many don’t know what such abortions entail, as former abortion employees like Carol Everett have testified that many such workers try to keep young women from knowing the details of their unborn’s development. Many women un-sedated also feel the terrible pain, and Everett saw at least one being restrained during the procedure. Apparently choice only goes so far; talk about violating a woman.

          • dance commander

            . But things like partial birth and D&E are horrific procedures that
            many doctors, nurses and even pro-choice champions have turned against.

            WOMEN DON’T HAVE POST 24 WEEK ABORTIONS FOR RECREATION DO YOU FUCKING UNDERSTAND

            LIFE HEALTH OF MOTHER

            SEVERE FETAL DEFORMITY

            POST VIABILITY ABORTION IS ILLEGAL AND IS ONLY UNDERTAKEN FOR SEVER MEDICAL MEMERGENCY

            DO YOU FUCKING UNDERSTAND

            Many women un-sedated also feel the terrible pain, and Everett saw at least one being restrained during the procedure. Apparently choice only goes so far; talk about violating a woman.

            Proof needed, not hearsay, you ignorant, lying twit.

          • goatini

            About Carol Everett, another notorious perjurer like Stanek:

            Her claim that she ‘owned’ abortion clinics was false and was the subject of litigation which can substantiate the falsehood of that claim.

            She did not ‘quit’ but she was fired when it was clearly demonstrated on public television that she was guilty of consumer fraud. under those circumstances any clinic she was associated with would become a liability to the owner. One has to wonder what happened to allay those charges.

            She was a liar, and fraud, by her own admission, when she was involved in the abortion clinics. When she left this job she simply traded in one lucrative career for another. All she had to do was tell the anti-abortionists what lies they wanted to hear.

            She has still no need for truth. In her any ‘lie will do’ zeal she makes such false claims as “We now know that 92 percent of women who have abortions experience post-abortion syndrome. One out of four of those women will have problems with future pregnancies, including sterility. ” ( quoted here )

            The driving force behind her involvement in the abortion clinic business was exactly the same as the driving force behind her involvement in the anti-abortion industry. She was driven by monetary greed and the desire for recognition.

            The leopard has not changed her spots. She has just moved back into the jungle and is now surviving with bigger carnivores.

          • dance commander

            http://eileen.undonet.com/Main/7_R_Eile/Everett.html

            I have what appears to be a statement or news release,
            on the letterhead of William W. West, Jr., M.D., outpatient psychiatry,
            obstetrics and Gynecology, signed and dated 2/24/88, that is two pages, single-spaced,
            all related to Carol Everett, excerpts as follows:

            “As a physician who performs abortions,
            I was once closely associated professionally with Ms. Carol Everett, the recently
            announced public affairs director of Greater Dallas Right to Life Committee
            and Texas Coalition for Life. Although I would prefer to hold an old acquaintance
            in positive regard, I recall no good reason to dispute her claim that she
            was involved in the provision of abortion services primarily for reasons
            no more honorable than simple greed for money.

            PAGE 2

            “I do, however, think I have god reason to dispute
            her current claim of moral “conversion”. I seriously doubt that her motives
            have really changed. Numerous greed-struck religious frauds (and a few secular
            ones, as well) have in recent years developed sensationalistic, melodramatic,
            inflammatory, and blatantly fraudulent anti-abortion propaganda into one
            of their biggest and most dependable money-makers. I would not doubt that
            Carol Everett is being paid very well by Bill Price and his organizations
            to say whatever they think is likely to advance their agenda and hustle monetary
            contributions, with little regard for either truth or plausibility.

            “One thing Ms. Everett claims is that callous
            greed like hers is a common motive among those who are involved in the provision
            of abortion services. This is flagrantly untrue. She should know better. She
            also contends that legal abortion, as practiced in the United States today,
            is prohibitively dangerous. In actual fact, it is probably about as safe
            as having a wisdom tooth pulled and is certainly much safer than having a
            baby, its only alternative. She should now this.

            “She claims to have “seen the light” and resigned
            from her clinic position in 1983. Actually, she was fired and was quite bitter
            and fiercely vengeful about it. It seems likely that she is still seeking
            revenge by ragefully attacking abortion providers in general, and with outrageous
            dishonesty.

            “She was never even the owner of a clinic as
            she claims. This fact can be verified by reference to legal documents on
            file with the Dallas County District Clerk (Cause No. 85-522-L, styled Carol
            Everett vs. J. Harvey Johnson, et. al.).

            “. . .Among Ms. Everett’s various fraudulent
            claims is her assertion that abortion surgery is deliberately performed on
            women who are not actually pregnant in order to get their money. Give me
            a break! I hope there are not many among us who are cynical and gullible
            enough to actually believe such garbage!

            “Ms. Everett’s high level of dishonesty is quite
            compatible with that of the so-called “Pro-Life Movement”. Perhaps she can thus feel more at home on that side of the fence. My question is whether she is lying or deluded, and whether she has truly converted in any real sense.

            . . .

            SHE’S A LIAR JUST LIKE YOU AND IT’S BEEN PROVEN

          • Jennifer

            You’re still a screaming fool. I’ll look further into Everett’s history, but numerous others have testified what happens to women in the process of later abortions.

          • dance commander

            I’m not the one who is lying and flat out making shit up.

            I’ve got facts to back up my case.

            You’re just an ignorant lying sack of shit who has erected a strawman and is arguing against that.

            WOMEN DON’T HAVE ABORTIONS OF CONVENIENCE AT 8 MONTHS BESIDES IT IS ILLEGAL

          • goatini

            Only fool screaming here is you, dearie. The rest of us are defending our civil, human and Constitutional rights from those like you.

  • L-dan

    I don’t even understand your question. You support abortion before there’s an actual child. By definition, children are not in-utero and can’t be affected by abortion. So, what does killing children have to do with this line of thought?

    There are very few people who don’t understand that a zygot/embryo/fetus is in the process of becoming a baby. They are not lied to. Many of them already have children. This idea that those who get abortions are somehow too stupid or confused to know what they are doing infantilizes them. Look at how many women will get an abortion in their lifetime. Do you really think they were all stupid or lied to?

    • Jennifer

      No, some of them knew perfectly well what they were doing. I never called them stupid for pete’s sake, but I’m sorry, some abortions are of real, tiny children. And I don’t think a lot of women knew the exact time a heartbeat begins.

      • L-dan

        1. what makes them ‘real, tiny children’? A heartbeat? You realize that heart cells will beat in a petri dish? There’s no actual heart when they start beating in an embryo. Nor do beating heart cells = person.

        2. Why do you think knowing when those cells start beating would change their minds?

        3. So you are for forcing people through pregnancy?

        4. To get back to the point of the article: So, if they know perfectly well what they’re doing, and you think what they’re doing is wrong, what do you think should happen to them?

        • Jennifer

          How about a functioning brain, working limbs, muscles, nerves, bones, fingernails? Have you read what happens to babies in partial birth? They feel everything, excruciatingly. So if a woman waits until she has a child with all those things, yeah, I think they should tell her NO. If a woman waits until eight months to abort her kid, I don’t know, what would you think should happen to a woman who smothered a born child while they slept? Which would actually be a less painful death than piercing their skulls or injecting them with burning saline. If a woman wants to end a pregnancy, she needs to do it very early on, before it’s a moving, breathing, feeling INFANT.

          • L-dan

            Do you know how many abortions happen at 8 months? Not many.

            And if you think partial birth abortion is excruciating (no..it’s not since the fetus is generally dead before the induction of labor in a legally performed procedure), what do you think they feel during birth? Their head is literally being crushed as it squeezes through the birth canal. This is why babies have soft spots on their heads, the skull bones are not yet fused to allow for that squeezing during birth.

            So, you’re here arguing about the horrors of a very tiny number of abortions. Those done at this point in pregnancy are nearly always due to health issues and are done in this fashion because it is safer for the person carrying the fetus than having to cut the dead fetus into pieces while still inside the uterus. Saline abortions are not done here anymore, btw. You’re getting your information from ancient sources.

          • Jennifer

            “no..it’s not since the fetus is generally dead before the induction of labor in a legally performed procedure”

            Yes, due to the horrific procedures I mentioned.

            “Their head is literally being crushed as it squeezes through the birth canal. This is why babies have soft spots on their heads, the skull bones are not yet fused to allow for that squeezing during birth”

            Are you honestly comparing the two? One is an ancient, natural procedure necessary for the existence of a species, the other is cruel and horrific; I don’t see anyone advocating that women stop giving birth.

            “Those done at this point in pregnancy are nearly always due to health issues and are done in this fashion because it is safer for the person carrying the fetus than having to cut the dead fetus into pieces while still inside the uterus”

            Safer? Not because cutting the child into pieces would be horrific? I guess to many doctors it’s not, because if smaller babies survive an abortion or are too small for a partial birth, they’ve gotten dismembered on the operating table. Or the doctors simplt refuse to try and save them.

            The point is that many such abortions are at all allowed. I don’t care how “tiny” the number is; do you know how tiny the number of pregnant rape victims is? But you don’t ignore those.

          • L-dan

            Well, now it’s obvious you’re getting your information from some crackpot sites.

            “Are you honestly comparing the two? One is an ancient, natural procedure
            necessary for the existence of a species, the other is cruel and
            horrific; I don’t see anyone advocating that women stop giving birth.”

            What difference does it make whether the process is natural or not if it’s still causing pain? Why would ‘partial birth’ be *more* cruel and painful than natural birth as far as the skull being crushed when going through the birth canal? That makes no sense.

            But basically, you’re arguing all of this nonsense over…partial birth abortion, which is already banned? All this ranting and raving when…surprise, you’ve already won?

          • dance commander

            Yes, due to the horrific procedures I mentioned.

            jesus christ you’re one of the dumbest people who has ever posted here

            NO, THE FETUS IS ALREADY DEAD YOU FUCKING MORON

            One is an ancient, natural procedure necessary for the existence of a species, the other is cruel and horrific; I don’t see anyone advocating that women stop giving birth.

            Abortion is ancient too and has been practised for thousands of years.

            Not because cutting the child into pieces would be horrific?

            So you would prefer that a woman died from an obstructed labour rather than rip the fetus into pieces?

            Why do you hate other women so much?

          • HeilMary1

            She hates competition?

          • Lily_ZzTop

            lol… haha. more likely, I think just affected by too much nitwit propaganda from the Right and their crazed sources, unfortunately.

          • dance commander

            Oh, and the whole reason for a partial birth abortion in cases of 1) the fetus is doomed 2) the woman is doomed is BECAUSE IT’S LESS TRAUMATIC AND DANGEROUS FOR EVERYONE INVOLVED

            But because you and your dumbfuck anti-choice buddies were so disgusted by ‘partial birth abortion’ it was made illegal, and now doctors just have to remove dead and dying fetii by tearing them into pieces. You can thank your pro-life pro-torture movement for that.

          • goatini

            Correct. Intact D&E is, in many cases in which tragic diagnoses require a safe, legal late-term termination, THE best option for the patient’s health. It also results in an intact corpse so that the family can privately mourn their loss – since ALL safe, legal late-term terminations that resulted in the intact D&E option are of very much wanted pregnancies, with very tragic outcomes.

            The forced-birth cabal made up the ridiculous term “partial birth abortion”, which simply is NOT a procedure – it’s just made-up nonsense for the benefit of throwing some red meat to the forced-birthers. The forced-birth cabal removed one of the BEST and SAFEST options that a physician has at his or her disposal in such tragic situations. And nitwits like this little girl trolling here are PROUD of such vicious ignorance.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Actually, since rape often goes unreported and no one is required to give the reasons for their abortion, I imagine the number is quite a bit larger than statistics show.

          • Jennifer

            Quite possibly, though I think pregnancies in rape are rare too due to the unnatural manner of the act.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Actually the odds of pregnancy are pretty much the same–your body really doesn’t have a way to ‘shut that whole thing down’.

          • dance commander

            Rape is not ‘unnatural’. The sobering fact is that rape is a reproductive strategy utilized by males over thousands and even millions of years to propagate their genes at no cost to their resources. As I keep repeating, you are an ignorant asshole.

          • fiona64

            though I think pregnancies in rape are rare too due to the unnatural manner of the act.

            What. The. Fuck?

            I have news for you, sweetie. Ova and spermatazoa don’t care whether or not you consented. And no, the woman’s body doesn’t have a way of “shutting that thing down.”

            Is anyone really this stupid? Really?

          • Ella Warnock

            No shit. She’s down with that nutball Akin. ““If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.

            “Legitimate” rape. It’s a thing. Really.

            Sigh. Jesus really did weep.

          • colleen2

            Republican women are not very bright.

          • colleen

            You are an ignorant rape apologist. This is a sick and disgusting belief and one with no biological basis at all. It is the sort of thing that rapists repeat, rapists and women who raise their sons to rape.

          • HeilMary1

            Boy, are you stupid! Studies show trauma actually increases conception rates because trauma TRIGGERS OVULATION! This is why UNnatural Family Cramming (NFP) always FAILS!

          • dance commander

            https://www.sciencenews.org/article/ovulation-spurred-newfound-semen-ingredient

            “Semen doesn’t just ferry sperm. It also bears a mystery ingredient that
            turns on ovulation in some animals and may even pump up fertility in
            humans as well. The molecule, nerve growth factor, kick-starts egg
            release and revs up pregnancy-protective hormones in llamas, researchers
            report online August 20 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
            Llama semen is loaded with NGF, says study coauthor and veterinarian
            Gregg Adams of the University of Saskatchewan in Saskatoon, Canada. The
            protein is also found in the semen of bulls and humans.”

            ____________

            there you go you ignorant fucking herp derp

            semen triggers ovulation

            human sperm has the protein that does it

            pregnancy from rape is as common as pregnancy without rape

          • HeilMary1

            Thank you! This is also why NFP bullies are mother-killing LIARS!

          • Lily_ZzTop

            Sorry, I was a little taken aback in my other comment.

            Come on Jennifer… HOW CAN YOU BELIEVE THAT….AS A FEMALE YOURSELF?!?! Come on now. IT’S ONE THING FOR BRAIN-DEAD WALKING PENIS TO LIE TO HIMSELF TO THINK SO, AND THAT SILLY, FLUFF-BRAINED CRAZY LADY WHO TALKED ABOUT “the female body being able to shut that down” (OMFGROFLMFFAO!! I suppose she was only parroting the same 50′era nonsense that her mother told her, unfortunately it only made her look ignorant as hell), but surely, don’t YOU know better?!?!?

            YOU LIVE IN THIS CENTURY DON’T YOU?!?!

            Didn’t you go to health class in high school?? do you really think YOUR body knows if its being raped or not?? (YOU do, your body won’t.) I sure hope you never are, but seriously…. if you believe this than i seriously wonder for your mind… just how much MUSH and rancid lies of the right wing NUT-BAGS are you letting in there?!?! You may really wish to re-evaluate some of these “facts” you’re believing.

            A penis is a penis, vagina is a vagina, and sperm is sperm. if the timing is right, CONGRATULATIONS!! jackpot…. There is officially a bun in your oven! It could just as easily be a rape baby as an ‘i-love-my-hubby’ baby.

          • colleen2

            The number of pregnancies caused by rape is not trivial.

          • HeilMary1

            Dummy, did you know petite and underage mothers’ pelvic bones are too small for fetal skulls, and that is why they gruesomely died together before midwives invented skull-crushing abortions? Did you know the Catholic Church opposed c-sections for those mothers because they limited those women to a measly maximum of four children, never mind that c-sections saved both infants and mothers from obstructed labor deaths?

          • dance commander

            Have you read what happens to babies in partial birth? They feel everything, excruciatingly

            No, they don’t. The fetus is sedated while in the womb. And for a late term abortion, due to medical necessity, the woman is sedated – and if she is sedated with anesthesia, so is the fetus.

            Tell me, would you rather a woman die in childbirth from obstructed labour than remove the fetus in pieces? Would you?

            Seems to me you don’t give a flying fuck if women suffer, yet you are oh so concerned about something that can’t even feel pain and isn’t even aware of it’s own existence.

            If a woman wants to end a pregnancy, she needs to do it very early on, before it’s a moving, breathing, feeling INFANT.

            Perhaps if you anti-choicers stopped trying to outright ban medication abortions then women might not have abortions after 20 weeks.

            Bear in mind, 91% of abortions are before 13 weeks, 61% are before 9 weeks, and ONLY 1.5% are after 20 weeks and those are for medical necessity in a majority of cases.

            Abortions after 24 weeks are for medical necessity. But you don’t care about that, you’d rather see a woman die from a pregnancy than abort a doomed fetus.

            You’re an ignorant, lying piece of shit.

          • Jennifer

            Nurses and doctors have testified that babies FEEL the instruments piercing their skulls and sometimes they’re mutilated after birth; would it be ok to mutilate a woman because she was sedated? You are one disgusting, sick human being and talking to you is a waste of my time. I used to be more pro-choice because I thought the window of abortion before a child was wider, and since you asked, I personally would rather die trying to bring my baby to life than have my child cut into pieces because it might be a Down-Syndrome baby or even a danger to me. People like you do’t give a damn about anything but the Self, and I’m not going to waste another minute of my life talking to you. Crawl under a rock.

          • L-dan

            Oh please. Mutilated after birth? Really? You think that they’re just hacking up infants on the table?

            Glad that you are willing to give your life for a pregnancy. That really seems like it should be an individual choice though, not a requirement. Forcing someone to give their life for a pregnancy seems far more cruel than any abortion. You’re talking about the suffering of an indisputable person dying for a pregnancy against their will vs. the non-suffering of a fetus that cannot yet feel, think, or fear.

            *you* came here, to a pro-choice site, to tell us that we’re unfeeling, uncaring, etc. and so forth. Go back under your own rock. This is our space, not yours, you uneducated, sanctimonious twit.

          • Jennifer

            I said that a person ok with a procedure that destroys a brain cruelly or tears up an infant is indeed uncaring and unfeeling, and find it humorous that I receive the label myself when being perfectly fine with earlier abortions. I’m sorry, but yes, some tiny fetuses have been torn limb from limb and dumped in the trash, whether inside or outside the womb. Under a rock, LMAO; I came out from under ignorance to find out what abortions really entail. SO sorry I invaded a space reserved only for pro-choicers, but the reactions are rather humorous, if also pitiful. Thanks for the half-assed scientific discussion.

          • dance commander

            I said that a person ok with a procedure that destroys a brain cruelly
            or tears up an infant is indeed uncaring and unfeeling, and find it
            humorous that I receive the label myself when being perfectly fine with
            earlier abortions

            So you would rather that a woman die from obstructed labour or hemorrhaging or sepsis or any of the other late term compilcations than receive an abortion?

            And you call me cruel and heartless?

            OH THE IRONY

          • dance commander

            Do you want to legislate that any woman dying from pregnancy should not receive an abortion and just fucking die?

          • Ella Warnock

            Savita Halappanavar was killed by some half-assed medical “care” if that’s what you’d like to call it. She showed up with a 17 weeks’ gestation nonviable WANTED pregnancy whereupon – lo and behold – a “heartbeat was detected. Now, heartbeat detection at 17 weeks still does not denote a viable pregnancy. I suppose in the Pro-lifiest of Pro-life countries, what it DOES denote is that we won’t pay much attention to either one of the patients. We COULD treat ONE of the patients – the one with the greatest chance of survival and she could go on to have other wanted children. Or, you know, we could just ignore and refuse to treat either one of them since the weaker of the two will die anyway and, hey, the woman wouldn’t want to live after THAT tragedy, would she? No “decent” woman, anyway.

            So, as we see in a pro-life country with protocol in place to save the life of the woman even if the fetus is doomed, there WAS STILL no one willing to go out on a limb for Savita. No one to advocate for HER best interests. Yes, yes, rules and regulations and all sorts of proper paperwork exist in the modern Irish reproductive care system that are to guard against such tragic outcomes.

            The one thing you can never completely remove from the equation is FEAR. This is a bad scene – FEAR. This whole thing could go tricky fast – FEAR. Because this situation involved an unhealthy fetus that may or may not live – FEAR. Could I lose my license and who knows what else – FEAR. If I don’t make what the Overlords will recognize the the “right” choice, how severe will the blowback be for me and mine.

            Savita was the canary in the coal mine. I doubt she ever sought such a role. She should be well and whole now and either eagerly awaiting her next child, or holding her newborn. Let me be very clear on this: If it had not been for such an atmosphere of FEAR, she would be. And that’s something that ANYONE could look upon with joy.

          • dance commander
          • goatini

            Yeah, facts, science, and civil rights are “pitiful”. Only in Forced Birther Land.

          • dance commander

            Aw, angry because I have shown what an ignorant twit you are?

            WHEN THE MAJORITY OF ABORTIONS OCCUR THE FETUS CANNOT FEEL PAIN BECAUSE IT LACKS THE CAPACITY

            FOR LATE TERM ABORTIONS THE WOMAN IS UNDER ANESTHESIA AND SO IS THE FETUS THEREFORE NO PAIN AND NO SUFFERING

            YOU DUMB FUCKING MORONIC TWIT

          • goatini

            What “nurse”? That notorious perjurer Stanek? And what “doctor”? The discredited and debunked Nathanson?

          • Ella Warnock

            So. Much. Word.

          • dance commander

            Nurses and doctors have testified that babies FEEL the instruments
            piercing their skulls and sometimes they’re mutilated after birth

            Proven you wrong on that, dumbass.

          • colleen

            I’m not going to waste another minute of my life talking to you. Crawl under a rock.

            I would offer you the same suggestion. Find another blog. go away.

          • HeilMary1

            May Goddess bless you with obstetric incontinence or a face-eating cancer caused by a blasted “blessed” fetus!

          • Lily_ZzTop

            Jennifer, I do not believe any of this kind of testimony to be legit. I have read and heard many times that these so-called “professionals” and their partial birth abortion horror-stories have been thoroughly debunked by now. If there was any truth to these stories, I would be willing to consider being against PBA’s and late-stage abortions. But so far, based on all the information I have to date, this doesn’t seem to be the case. The opposite in fact seems to be true, that the fetus does not suffer at all, as others on here have described.

            It is, understandably, a very emotional topic; and the anti-choice movement is extremely effective at bringing in misinformation to be used towards the purposes of emotionally inflaming people on this issue, to great effect.

          • HeilMary1

            What woman would choose a risky $30,000 late-term abortion over a safe $300 early abortion just on whim??

          • HeilMary1

            And if the fetus’s brain is completely outside of its skull, should the mother be sawed in half to remove the non-viable fetus in one piece so it can suffer and die on a counter?

        • fiona64

          For crying out loud, she certainly does sound as though she buys into the (long-debunked) homunculus hypothesis of human development, doesn’t she?

          • colleen2

            Republican women aren’t all that bright but they can sure be mean.

          • Ella Warnock

            I’ve noticed that. They always seem to come from a position of privilege and entitlement, too.

      • goatini

        All children, ever, have already been born.

      • HeilMary1

        Goddess, you are stupid!

        • dance commander

          Dumber than a box of rocks.

  • Jennifer

    That doesn’t even make sense. If a woman suddenly decides she doesn’t want to be pregnant anymore, that makes the fetus a violater of her body? If an eight-month pregnant woman decided she didn’t want the baby, would you really be ok with her killing it?

    • dance commander

      At 8 month the fetus is viable so induced labour or c-section would be the methods used to end the pregnancy.

    • L-dan

      Besides the answer below…well, yes it does. How else would you describe someone using your body against your will?

      Nor do I generally have to worry about whether I’m ok with abortions at 8 months or not. Abortion, like other medical procedures, is regulated by medical standards of care. At that point in gestation, that usually means birth, as noted below. If abortion is being considered instead, that usually indicates that there are major problems involved (or that you’re looking at an illegal provider).

    • Cactus_Wren

      IF the moon were made of mozzarella cheese, would you be ok with turning it into the world’s biggest pizza?

    • fiona64

      What is up with anti-choicers constantly bringing up the fiction of a woman deciding so close to term that she just doesn’t want to deal with being pregnant anymore?

      Why are all of you so ludicrously *stupid*?

      • Stephanie Lastra

        its obvious you are all uncomfortable with an abortion at 8 months, which does happen and is legal. that’s good, it shows you aren’t in total denial of the humanity of unborn babies. but its so odd to me that your deciding who a person is based on how old they are (12 weeks vs 8 months), how big they are (1lb vs 8lbs), the way they look and their abilities. none of it stands logical reasoning, sorry!

        • Stephanie Lastra

          this is a 12 week old unborn baby by the way

          • colleen

            Stephanie….you forgot to include the size (this was taken under a microscope) and I am not entirely certain that that is a human embryo.

            I’m surprised you aren’t posting it in black face and singing ‘Mama’. Y’all need to grow up.

          • Jennifer

            Because pro-lifers are racist, Stephanie.

          • Arekushieru

            They are. Because they complain about Black ‘genocide’, when Black women are more typically seen occupying the lower echelons of the economic classes than their white counterparts yet limit their access to birth control even further by implementing such destructive policies as cuts to food stamps, TANF, WIC and SNAP benefits, since white woman aren’t typically affected by cuts to these social supports. Therefore, they are implementing racist policies, then attempting to shift blame by saying that black women who CHOOSE to have abortions are somehow either being brainwashed by the ‘pro-abort’ forces or are being racist against themselves. Usually, racism refers to systematic oppression, not a simple RESPONSE to that oppression. SFS.

            Also, black women tend to have more babies than their white counterparts, yet, mostly, the anti-choice tends to focus on the OTHER side. That’s pretty damn racist because that means you aren’t addressing the REAL issues black women face (while simultaneously UNDERCUTTING them), then trying to turn it around and dump the blame on the shoulders of the people who ARE addressing the real issues.

          • Stephanie Lastra

            I am on WIC and SNAP. You are confusing Republican with “pro-life”, there are pro-lifers from every race, and socio-economic class. I am not racist, thankfully I was raised with a family who doesn’t deny white privilege and taught me better than that but some people cant face real arguments so resort to stereotypes and name calling. I am thinking that you can do better than that.

          • Arekushieru

            Sorry, but I AM white, and as such can judge the members of my more privileged race from the same perspective as the rest of them, and the majority of people who are Pro-’Life’, or rather, anti-choice, not truly representative of what the term Pro-Life should actually mean, like Wendy Davis, are Republicans. I am not going to fall into the trap of false equivalency as you most emphatically seem to want me to. Just because there are a FEW Democratic Liberals who are Pro-’Life’, or, rather, anti-choice, you want me to equate them with the MAJORITY of Republicans that share those very same beliefs? Uh, no, that would not be rational. So sorry.

          • Stephanie Lastra

            and I agree with you on most of what you said, it is frustrating for me as well

          • fiona64

            Yep. At similar stages of development, embryos of viviparous vertebrates are almost entirely *indistinguishable from one another.*

            A skink embryo looks more “human” than a human one, to be perfectly honest. http://www.exploratorium.edu/exhibits/embryo/embryoflash.html

          • Stephanie Lastra

            im not sure what your last sentence is referring to

          • L-dan

            12 weeks post-fertilization, which is more like 14 weeks LMP, which is how most medical folks will measure it.

            Only noted because of the manipulative subtext.

            Additionally, and? I’m supposed to change my mind about whether or not it has more rights than I do based on how it looks?

          • Stephanie Lastra

            I am pretty sure its 12 weeks LMP, did you see it stated otherwise? I always go by LMP unless stated otherwise. And, if you read my previous comment I was arguing *against* basing personhood on how a human being looks however I noticed some comments indicating a lack of understanding in regards to fetal development around this stage so I added this picture. But not, I would never suggest personhood should be based on how one looks or your size, etc. but sadly this line of thinking is frequently used in the pro-abortion movement.

          • L-dan

            No, I’m just rather accustomed to people using post-fertilization dates to muddy the water. I haven’t looked for that particular illustration, and there’s not a huge amount of visual change 12-14 weeks.

            I find it amusing that the “what it looks like, or how big it is”
            argument would be one you seem to find often with pro-choice debaters, other than from the standpoint that something the size of a kidney bean is really not developed enough to meet any realistic criteria of ‘person’, any more than a dividing clump of cells does.

            Instead, I usually see the forced-gestation crowd pointing at pictures
            like that to argue that it ‘looks’ like a baby and therefore is the same as a full term baby in terms of personhood. Not that the pro-choice position rests solely upon personhood in the first place.

            The fact that it looks very similar to any number of other vertebrates
            through most of embryohood does, however, highlight that you really can’t base personhood upon appearance, or chicken embryos are people.

          • Lily_ZzTop

            LOL!! Oh gads! oh NO!! That must mean….(cue Bates Motel music)…. I’m a SERIAL KILLER!!! (gasp!!!!) No!!! Say it ain’t SO!!

          • Lily_ZzTop

            i …i want to stop…BUT I JUST CAN’T!! They’re just so…. so… DELICIOUS and satisfying!! especially the brown ones!!

          • Alex Harman

            Actually, most of us in the pro-choice movement base our recognition of personhood on having a conscious mind and not being an obligate endoparasite.

          • goatini

            Rights accrue to citizens at birth.

          • dance commander

            Until the zygote/embryo/fetus is capable of sentience it isn’t a person.

          • fiona64

            No, actually, that’s an embryo. It is completely non-viable.

            Sorry that you skipped so many years of basic biology class, but that’s really not my fault.

            And late term abortions (your ridiculous 8-month example) do NOT happen absent medical necessity.

            God, you people are ridiculous.

          • Stephanie Lastra

            viability is a separate discussion, I am aware of that considering the fact that I have TWO children and am currently 6 weeks pregnant!

          • fiona64

            I have a 27-year-old son, and I had a hellish pregnancy (40 weeks of hyperemesis gravidarum). Now that we’ve compared resumes, suffice it to say that your functional gonads do not render you a greater subject matter expert than anyone else.

          • Stephanie Lastra

            what do you consider medical necessity? if a person is that late in their pregnancy and something happens, surely a C-section or induction is much faster than a 2-3 day long abortion! but the goal isn’t health, the goal is a dead baby.

          • fiona64

            If I’m not the woman or her physician, it is not up to me to determine what is or is not a medical necessity.

            You see, unlike the anti-choice who like to practice medicine without a license, I keep my nose out of other people’s medical matters.

          • L-dan

            And you know what? That’s generally what happens in a health emergency. A C-section. (since usually the sorts of emergencies that would require this kind of thing mean that the stress of induction and labor is a bad idea.) Because at 8 months, these are wanted pregnancies, and they want efforts made to keep them. Sometimes though? Horrible shit happens.

            But you know what else? I’m not going to spend any energy regulating those decisions, because I’m not the one who should be making those decisions. Doctors…who know what is least risky get to work on that, along with the pregnant people and their families who are actually stuck in these situations. There is no reason to make their lives harder in situations that are already difficult.

          • Arekushieru

            The goal is not a dead ‘baby’. It is the termination of a pregnancy. If you have been pregnant you should KNOW the difference between pregnancy and fetus. If not, you should get a different doctor.

          • expect_resistance

            Nope, that’s a fetus not a baby.

          • dance commander
          • expect_resistance

            Speaking of embryo photos, I had to post this one.

          • Ella Warnock

            And?

        • goatini

          Rights accrue to persons at birth.

          It’s so odd to me that forced-birthers seem to forget that all-important EVENT called BIRTH. Oh, wait, it’s NOT “odd” – it’s deliberate deception and manipulation.

        • L-dan

          err… in general, the pro-choice arguments of when personhood begins don’t hinge on age or size. Those things are markers for development…where a batch of dividing cells is definitely not a person, an infant is one, and there’s development in between that’s more and more ‘personlike’.

          Additionally, people don’t get to hijack the bodies of other people for life support. So calling embryos and fetuses ‘persons’ still doesn’t mean we’d agree that abortion is wrong.

          Nor does the pro-choice position hinge solely upon personhood. But that’s more argument than I have time for tonight.

          I’m actually not terribly uncomfortable with abortion at 8 months other than the fact that if one is happening, it’s due to some really unfortunate circumstances, and my heart goes out to the parents involved. I’m far more uncomfortable with people making their lives even harder by placing ever more stringent restrictions on abortion based upon lies.

          Focusing on less than 1% of all abortions to make an emotional argument that abortion is horrible is disingenuous and ignores the realities.

        • Arekushieru

          We’re NOT uncomfortable. We just can’t wrap our heads around the FACT that you believe this occurs as a matter of course. Also because, when women DO have abortions at late-term, it’s MOST OFTEN because the pregnancy is life-threatening to the woman or the fetus has genetic anomalies incompatible with life. That YOU are comfortable with forcing women to carry untenable pregnancies to term without caring about how this may impact her life and that of children she may ALREADY have (because, let’s face it, MOST women who have abortions, DO have existing children, ALREADY) by killing her AND the fetus, and leaving her children motherless IS fucking uncomfortable.

          And, btw, we aren’t denying the humanity of a fetus by calling them non-persons OR fetuses. But YOU are denying the humanity of women by trying to deny them their rights and grant MORE rights to a fetus.

          • Stephanie Lastra

            give me one life threatening situation that requires a baby be born dead. one! its a LIE. C-section, induction, etc is what mothers do in those situations when they want a living baby.

          • Alex Harman

            Not all fetuses are viable at 8 months — when a dead baby is the only possible outcome, you use the procedure that’s least harmful to the mother, unless you’re a Catholic misogynist like the doctors and administrators at University Hospital Galway who murdered Savita Halappanavar.

          • L-dan

            Did you even look at the links above of fetuses with gross deformities that are incompatible with life? There is no reason to force someone to continue carrying those to term. Remaining pregnant with a nonviable fetus means continuing to risk life and health for pretty much nothing. While some will chose to do so, many would prefer not to. That’s not even getting into the daily emotional trauma of remaining pregnant and facing the happy “when are you due” comments while knowing that you aren’t going to bring home a baby.

            You are against all abortions, but focus on the most extreme (and still lie about the necessity for them). That’s a bit disingenuous. Do you think we will go “oh yes, you’re right, those are really wrong.” And then you’ll slip in with “ah, but these early term ones are just the same, so they’re wrong too!”?

            I mean, what’s the trolling supposed to accomplish? We’ve had such a rash of them this week. Is there some “try to convert the evil pro-abortionists” holiday I missed hearing about?

          • fiona64

            Eclampsia.

            You’re welcome.

          • Stephanie Lastra

            actually not true, yes pregnancy needs to end but it ends in an early birth not a procedure with the only intention of killing a baby before they are born, either way the baby is born but abortion kills him/her first

          • fiona64

            No, dear. Not all cases of eclampsia and pre-eclampsia end in “early birth.” Educate yourself. The pregnancy must be ended in order to save the woman’s life, and not all cases are late enough in gestation to have an “early birth.

            And I’m sorry if you are not bright enough to know the difference between a fetus and an infant (or, as you insist on using slang terms, a baby). Infants are *born entities.*

          • HeilMary1

            From wikipedia:

            FATAL alobar holoprosencephaly, the most serious
            form, in which the brain fails to separate, is usually associated with severe
            facial anomalies, including lack of a nose and the eyes merged to a single median
            structure (cyclopia).

          • Stephanie Lastra

            ok, im not sure what that has to do with abortion

          • Arekushieru

            Hmm, pregnancy is the SECOND LEADING CAUSE OF DEATH WORLDWIDE. Guess what, those women who die from giving birth or maintaining an untenable pregnancy in countries where abortion is illegal leave their ACTUAL children fucking ORPHANS, and the FETUS DIES ALONG WITH THEM. OOPS.

          • Stephanie Lastra

            I am very appalled by how maternity care is in many countries. It is disgusting that women and babies die from complications that ARE preventable/treatable in the majority of cases. The answer is good maternity care, and access to it.

          • fiona64

            Um, sweetie? The US is #50 in maternal mortality — and it’s getting worse all the time. That means that 49 countries are *better at keeping pregnant women alive* than we are. Greece has the lowest maternal mortality rate in the world.

            Don’t pretend that this is something that only happens in developing nations, Stephanie; pregnancy kills women in the first world Every. Single. Day. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/24/maternal-mortality-rate-infographic_n_1827427.html

          • Stephanie Lastra

            im not pretending, im actually a HUGE advocate for improving maternity care in America. I am aware of where the USA ranks and why. However horrible a lot of the maternity care is here (esp for minority women) we don’t see the same exact issues here that we see in other countries where women often have a pelvis that is unable to pass a baby due to malnutrition and getting pregnant very young, among other reasons. Fistula is a serious problem in these countries that we don’t see here because we can have a C-section in the majority of cases. Our issue is OVER medicalization which is also dangerous.

          • Stephanie Lastra

            and I didn’t say it happens all the time, a single abortion at any stage is too much for me

          • HeilMary1

            Then may Goddess Karma bless you with a fatal pregnancy, MOTHER KILLER!

          • Arekushieru

            Then one single person defending themselves from rape must be horrific for you. Also, a woman dying from trying to illegally abort at any stage is too much for me. I actually care about women, though….

          • Stephanie Lastra

            im not sure what your rape comment is about, but being a survivor of horrible sexual abuse including rape, I really hope your not suggesting I would be against a women defending herself from a rapist?

        • cjvg

          8 months is way past viability which in general is at 24 weeks!
          No abortion are done at 8 months, they are called scheduled C-sections

          If you have to resort to lying in an attempt to create justification for your position, that only shows how truly weak your position is! If you can not produce a legit argument without having to resort to far fetched or even outright bald faced lies, you should just stop!

        • expect_resistance

          Nope, I’m not uncomfortable with late term abortions. Most abortions take place in the first 13 weeks and a very small percentage take place in the third trimester, which are highly regulated. The majority of women who have a third trimester abortion are doing this to save their lives or there is something wrong with the fetus. It’s not just like women wake up one morning after being pregnant for eight months and say, “Hey it’s time to have an abortion.” Saying that women nilly-willy chose to have a third trimester abortion is saying that women are stupid. Having an abortion is a personal medical decision that is none of your business. Please quit judging and shaming women.

          • Stephanie Lastra

            I don’t think women wake up one morning and decide to have an abortion, I never said that. But look at your reasons, 1.) womens life (no condition that I am aware of requires an abortion when the baby can be born and their life saved, or attempted to be saved) if her pregnancy needs to end, it can end early through live birth which is much faster and safer 2.) medical issues with baby, THIS ONE upsets me the MOST. So many people are ok with aborting a baby because the baby is disabled, its EUEGNICS. 9 out of 10 unborn babies with Down Syndrome are killed, it horrific.

          • tsara

            Eugenics is a social philosophy. If a pregnant individual decides that the disability of the fetus zie is carrying changes hir feelings about the pregnancy, giving birth, and potential parenthood so much that zie cannot handle it (physically, emotionally, financially, what have you), that is not eugenics.

          • Stephanie Lastra

            sorry but abortion has a major impact on every person in society, look at gendercide in India and China. Also, how would you feel if you had Down Syndrome and 9 out of 10 people with DS are aborted, and society thinks that’s a GOOD thing. You think that doesn’t reflect the attitude of prejudice and effect their treatment in our society?

          • Stephanie Lastra

            also we have an invested interest in the wellbeing and safety of people in our society, that’s what “Don’t like abortion, don’t have one” is a very silly and shallow and uneducated response. “Don’t like child abuse, don’t do it”, makes no sense. We have a responsibility to care about what happens to everyone, that’s why we make laws against murder and rape, etc

          • Ella Warnock

            India and China don’t have an abortion problem, per se, what they have is a societal and cultural problem that values males over females. What China has that the US does NOT have is state-sanctioned forced abortion, which is obviously the opposite of choice and would NOT be palatable to, say, a pro-CHOICER.

            None of these things, quite frankly, should have any bearing on whether *I* can have access to abortion, as I’m the type of person who is neither bullied by others into doing things I don’t want to do, nor am I unable to make important, difficult decisions more or less on my own. So, there’s a huge difference between a woman in my position and the position of a woman who’s valued less – or valued only for the males she can produce – in China or India.

            The issue here is society, religion, government, anyone at all, second-guessing my judgment. That’s highly offensive, as my judgment has quite successfully guided me through a half-century of life. I simply won’t tolerate any second-guessing, and I stand for others who feel similarly.

          • Alex Harman

            Downs syndrome is generally detected much earlier than the 8th month through amniocentesis; if a woman is having a legal abortion at that stage, it’s most likely because the fetus incapable of surviving outside the womb even if carried to term, due to a condition like anencephaly.

          • Stephanie Lastra

            not true, most of the abortions are done on babies who would survive, but the mother decides, often from pressure and misinformation from doctors, that their babies would have nothing but suffering when they live. but do we kill children who have cancer? or spina bifida? or any other disability? you cant ignore how society treats babies diagnosed prenatally in regards to disability rights.

          • expect_resistance

            Frankly, it’s none of your business why women have abortions. If you don’t like abortion don’t have one. I trust that women are making the right decision for them and their families. You do not need to know why or care about the reason they have an abortion.

          • HeilMary1

            Sawing women in half to remove in-tact fetuses with their dead brains fanning outside of their skulls does NOTHING for those DEAD fetuses and RUINS the mothers! But what do you sadistic selfish fetal idolaters care about minimizing suffering for women and non-viable fetuses?

          • Stephanie Lastra

            you must be confused, an abortion is only an abortion if the baby is alive. I would not suggest a C-section to remove a deceased fetus

          • choiceone

            You must be confused. The medical expression for a miscarriage is not “miscarriage” but spontaneous abortion. The procedure to remove a dead fetus is the same as that to treat a woman who has had an incomplete, delayed, or missed miscarriage/spontaneous abortion, It is normally going to be a surgical abortion, which a physician is likely to call a D&C or D&E. It could be, instead, a nonsurgical medical abortion, and the physician could call it administration of misoprostol, which is a drug used for chemical induced abortion.

            Why would a medical professional not used the word abortion when speaking to the patient? Doctors need to be sensitive to the state of mind of any pregnant patient. If she had wanted to have a baby and the fetus had died or an incomplete or missed spontaneous abortion had occurred, they could upset her and adversely affect her already adverse condition if she were one of those women who were as irrational as you about induced abortion..

          • Stephanie Lastra

            I am aware of the medical terms and treatments, I had two miscarriages sadly. Lay people don’t typically employ that language, esp. when the person they were responding to is not using that language, otherwise its confusing! I am not against removing a already deceased baby in whatever way is safest for the mother, of course…so I am not sure what your point was.

          • choiceone

            I honestly think that people who are “anti-abortion” and use the term abortion loosely, as if it only referred to cases of embryos and fetuses that exhibit signs of life, are constantly trying to mislead people by misrepresenting pregnancy. Pregnancy is a state of a woman’s body. She is not invisible in this state.

            If a pregnant woman dies, the embryo or pre-viable or non-viable fetus in her which has been exhibiting signs of life always immediately stops exhibiting those signs. On the other hand, if the embryo or pre-viable or non-viable fetus that has been exhibiting signs of life dies, the woman almost never dies.

            That is one aspect of the objective proof that the signs of life exhibited by the embryo or pre-viable or non-viable fetus are like the signs of life exhibited by such parts of her body as one of her legs. The embryo is living as part of the woman’s body, not as something separate from that body.

            Another aspect of this proof concerns what happens when scientists grow an embryo of any placental mammal from scratch in a petri dish. The zygote will live and grow into a morula and blastocyst based on the nutrient in the original oocyte. The blastocyst will continue to live and grow if provided the same amount of oxygen-rich nutrient typically available in the uterus, but its life span is the same as that of the pre-implantation blastocyst in the female. This life span can be doubled if the scientists uses instead the most powerful scientifically developed nutrient known, but the blastocyst will then die.

            A human blastocyst’s pre-implantation life span is 8-10 days. If it were not illegal to grow one in a petri dish beyond 14 days, we could expect its life span to be at maximum doubled to 16-20 days. That is a span shorter than the usual duration between a woman’s menstrual periods, so if we used the scientific nutrient in the uterus but prevented implantation, the blastocyst would just die and be expelled with menstruation. It is unable to grow beyond this, to go through organogenesis and to reach viability unless it implants into the bodily tissue of a live person and receives resources from that person’s blood.

            So there is no evidence of an embryo’s having a life of its own. There is only evidence that the woman’s body is giving it life.

            It is illegal in this nation for any person to use another person’s blood for a life-saving transfusion or to use any of the person’s organs for a life-saving transplant WITHOUT THAT PERSON’S CONSENT EXPRESSED in a legal contract. You own child does not have a right to your blood or organs without such consent.

            So anti-abortion people are claiming that an embryo has a right that no living person has, on the grounds that it has a life of its own, when all the scientific evidence points to its receiving life in the form of life extension from the woman’s body, as her legs are.

          • Stephanie Lastra

            if you think a totally unique human being who is temporarily reliant on a woman’s body to survive is the same thing as a body part, then you are not a person who I could possible have a conversation with…your are lacking a very basic understanding of the human life cycle which begins at conception and ends at death.

          • cjvg

            Where did you have your obstetric rotation?!
            Clearly you are completely ignorant of the complexity of childbirth and pregnancy, please refrain from uttering these unsustainable falsehoods!

          • Stephanie Lastra

            I don’t believe that for a moment, it takes much longer to perform a later term abortion and the mother still has to deliver the baby, dead. Unless the baby is dismembered, but her cervix still must be dilated like labor. I am not against treating women, even if the treatment MIGHT hurt or kill her unborn baby, her life matters the same. But, that is different than intentionally killing the baby

          • cjvg

            And in some cases that is the only thing that will save her life!

          • Stephanie Lastra

            are you an obstetrician? I have two children and I have researched the issue, if you have some sort of study showing that killing the baby before birth is safer for the mother, id like to see it.

          • cjvg

            I’m a clinical researcher
            It is unethical to perform studies where you deliberately increase the risk to the mothers life so you can see if it is fatal more often by letting her go into labor.

            The reason that we know it is fatal more often is because woman with these conditions invariable die or are severely hurt when they do attempt to go full term or happen to go into labor

            It is not legal to offer one group of women with these conditions an abortion, and not to another so you can determine how often it is fatal not to abort ( particularly because the outcome of not aborting is already known). The FDA will NOT approve studies of this nature!

          • Stephanie Lastra

            well of course, I would never suggest such a thing! It is rare to have any safety study in pregnant women, even with medications, because of the reasons you stated. I am just using logic to see that if being pregnant is causing a serious health complication for a woman, then ending the pregnancy as fast as possible would be the most reasonable course of action. I have never heard of a woman having an abortion for eclampsia, although it is true that the baby might die after birth if he or she is very premature, but that is unavoidable as continuing the pregnancy would kill both baby and mom. I looked it up briefly just to see if abortion is suggested as a treatment and the sites I saw didn’t suggest it, just treatments and monitoring and in the worst case a C-section/induction.

          • Stephanie Lastra

            in other words, due to treatments the baby may inadvertently and tragically die but an abortions goal is a dead baby, which has no health benefits for the mother of any kind.

          • cjvg

            You do not suggest it but you DO intimate that there are no studies of this kind so there is no legit reason to assume that abortions are necessary!

            Thereby you are strongly insinuating that abortion is a irrelevant and unnecessary procedure that should not be offered.

            People like you KILL women, did you know other women are living human being too?! In fact you clearly state exactly that, here is a look at your dishonest and medically seen irresponsible statements:

            “women’s life (no condition that I am aware of requires an abortion when the baby can be born and their life saved, or attempted to be saved) if her pregnancy needs to end, it can end early through live birth which is much faster and safer”

            “if you have some sort of study showing that killing the baby before birth is safer for the mother, id like to see it”.

            By the way were did you get eclampsia from, not a disease I mentioned although if an obstretrican decided that abortion is the safest way to end the pregnancy of HIS?HER PATIENT, who are you to gainsay such WITHOUT EVER EVEN HAVE SEEN THE PATIENT.

          • cjvg

            Except that you are!

          • cjvg

            Please read on the severity of;”Renal cortical necrosis, Postpartum thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura, Physiologic hydroureter of pregnancy, Preeclampsia and HELLP syndrome (hemolysis with a microangiopathic blood smear, elevated liver enzymes, and a low platelet count), thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura-hemolytic uremic syndrome (TTP-HUS),

            Grünfeld JP, Pertuiset N. Acute renal failure in pregnancy: 1987. Am J Kidney Dis 1987; 9:359.
            McCrae KR, Samuels P, Schreiber AD. Pregnancy-associated thrombocytopenia: pathogenesis and management. Blood 1992; 80:2697.
            Weiner CP. Thrombotic microangiopathy in pregnancy and the postpartum period. Semin Hematol 1987; 24:119.
            Sibai BM, Ramadan MK. Acute renal failure in pregnancies complicated by hemolysis, elevated liver enzymes, and low platelets. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1993; 168:1682.
            Martin JN Jr, Blake PG, Perry KG Jr, et al. The natural history of HELLP syndrome: patterns of disease progression and regression. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1991; 164:1500.
            McMinn JR, George JN. Evaluation of women with clinically suspected thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura-hemolytic uremic syndrome during pregnancy. J Clin Apher 2001; 16:202.
            Fakhouri F, Roumenina L, Provot F, et al. Pregnancy-associated hemolytic uremic syndrome revisited in the era of complement gene mutations. J Am Soc Nephrol 2010; 21:859.
            Egerman RS, Witlin AG, Friedman SA, Sibai BM. Thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura and hemolytic uremic syndrome in pregnancy: review of 11 cases. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996; 175:950.
            Lafayette RA, Druzin M, Sibley R, et al. Nature of glomerular dysfunction in pre-eclampsia. Kidney Int 1998; 54:1240.
            Sibai BM, Villar MA, Mabie BC. Acute renal failure in hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. Pregnancy outcome and remote prognosis in thirty-one consecutive cases. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1990; 162:777.
            McDonald SD, Han Z, Walsh MW, et al. Kidney disease after preeclampsia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Kidney Dis 2010; 55:1026.
            George JN. The association of pregnancy with thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura-hemolytic uremic syndrome. Curr Opin Hematol 2003; 10:339.
            Veyradier A, Obert B, Houllier A, et al. Specific von Willebrand factor-cleaving protease in thrombotic microangiopathies: a study of 111 cases. Blood 2001; 98:1765.
            Dashe JS, Ramin SM, Cunningham FG. The long-term consequences of thrombotic microangiopathy (thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura and hemolytic uremic syndrome) in pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 1998; 91:662.
            Vesely SK, George JN, Lämmle B, et al. ADAMTS13 activity in thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura-hemolytic uremic syndrome: relation to presenting features and clinical outcomes in a prospective cohort of 142 patients. Blood 2003; 102:60.
            Martin JN Jr, Bailey AP, Rehberg JF, et al. Thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura in 166 pregnancies: 1955-2006. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008; 199:98.
            Ezra Y, Rose M, Eldor A. Therapy and prevention of thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura during pregnancy: a clinical study of 16 pregnancies. Am J Hematol 1996; 51:1.
            Usta IM, Barton JR, Amon EA, et al. Acute fatty liver of pregnancy: an experience in the diagnosis and management of fourteen cases. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1994; 171:1342.
            Black, RM. Vascular diseases of the kidney. In: Rose, BD. Pathophysiology of Renal Disease, 2d ed, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1987, pp. 349-353.
            Matlin RA, Gary NE. Acute cortical necrosis. Case report and review of the literature. Am J Med 1974; 56:110.
            Fried AM. Hydronephrosis of pregnancy: ultrasonographic study and classification of asymptomatic women. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1979; 135:1066.
            Brandes JC, Fritsche C. Obstructive acute renal failure by a gravid uterus: a case report and review. Am J Kidney Dis 1991; 18:398.
            Stothers L, Lee LM. Renal colic in pregnancy. J Urol 1992; 148:1383.

            And this is only one (!) disease!!!

            lets check on pregnancy related hearth failure, this is often caused by a condition called peripartum cardiomyopathy and is actually caused by the fact that the woman is pregnant, otherwise she would NOT have hearth failure!

            How often this disease occurs is difficult to estimate since the CDC is not collecting or mandating or (in most states there is not even a category for this on the death certificate) the reporting of pregnancy and birth related deaths.

            Since 2007 the CDC complete discontinued to even collect any data on pregnancy and birth caused or related deaths

            However, the estimate is that it to occurs in approximately 1 out of every 3,000 births. Most often peripartum cardiomyopathy occurs during the last month of pregnancy or within the first five months after delivery, though in rare instances symptoms have been reported earlier in pregnancy.

            Some women continue to suffer with chronic heart problems, require a heart transplant or die from the condition, depending on the severity and early intervention.

            With appropriate treatment (depending on the severity of the condition this can vary from c-section, abortion, early delivery, bed rest, ACE inhibitors which is medication which can cause severe birth defects etc) approximately half of patients will recover within six months. post partum

            The risk of heart failure during obstetric delivery remains the third-highest cause of death for women 25 to 44, as of 2010.

            Folk JJ, Lipari CW, Nosovitch JT, et al. Evaluating ventricular function with B-type natriuretic peptide in obstetric patients. J Reprod Med 2005; 50:147.
            Hunt SA, Abraham WT, Chin MH, et al. 2009 focused update incorporated into the ACC/AHA 2005 Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Heart Failure in Adults: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines: developed in collaboration with the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation. Circulation 2009; 119:e391.
            Lee W. Clinical management of gravid women with peripartum cardiomyopathy. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 1991; 18:257.Alwan S, Polifka JE, Friedman JM. Angiotensin II receptor antagonist treatment during pregnancy. Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol 2005; 73:123.
            Lavoratti G, Seracini D, Fiorini P, et al. Neonatal anuria by ACE inhibitors during pregnancy. Nephron 1997; 76:235.
            Schubiger G, Flury G, Nussberger J. Enalapril for pregnancy-induced hypertension: acute renal failure in a neonate. Ann Intern Med 1988; 108:215.
            Cooper WO, Hernandez-Diaz S, Arbogast PG, et al. Major congenital malformations after first-trimester exposure to ACE inhibitors. N Engl J Med 2006; 354:2443.
            Brown CS, Bertolet BD. Peripartum cardiomyopathy: a comprehensive review. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1998; 178:409.
            Easterling TR, Carr DB, Brateng D, et al. Treatment of hypertension in pregnancy: effect of atenolol on maternal disease, preterm delivery, and fetal growth. Obstet Gynecol 2001; 98:427. Bayliss H, Churchill D, Beevers M, Beevers DG. Anti-hypertensive drugs in pregnancy and fetal growth: evidence for “pharmacological programming” in the first trimester? Hypertens Pregnancy 2002; 21:161.
            Joglar JA, Page RL. Treatment of cardiac arrhythmias during pregnancy: safety considerations. Drug Saf 1999; 20:85.
            Widerhorn J, Rubin JN, Frishman WH, Elkayam U. Cardiovascular drugs in pregnancy. Cardiol Clin 1987; 5:651.
            King CR, Mattioli L, Goertz KK, Snodgrass W. Successful treatment of fetal supraventricular tachycardia with maternal digoxin therapy. Chest 1984; 85:573.
            Vink GJ, Moodley J, Philpott RH. Effect of dihydralazine on the fetus in the treatment of maternal hypertension. Obstet Gynecol 1980; 55:519.
            Kuzniar J, Skret A, Piela A, et al. Hemodynamic effects of intravenous hydralazine in pregnant women with severe hypertension. Obstet Gynecol 1985; 66:453.
            Hall JB, Schmidt GA. Critical illness. In: Medical Disorders During Pregnancy, Barron WM, Lindheimer MD (Eds), Mosby Inc, St. Louis 2000. p.240.
            Wasserstrum N. Nitroprusside in preeclampsia. Circulatory distress and paradoxical bradycardia. Hypertension 1991; 18:79.
            Kale A, Kale E, Yalinkaya A, et al. The comparison of amino-terminal probrain natriuretic peptide levels in preeclampsia and normotensive pregnancy. J Perinat Med 2005; 33:121.

            Obviously it is a bit prohibitive to go through a list of all the major diseases, however you should now be aware that it is not nearly as simple as;”just have the baby”

          • Arekushieru

            Birth is neither FASTER NOR SAFER. DERP. It is the second leading cause of death for women, WORLDWIDE.

          • Mandy

            Hey! Did you know that discovering your fetus has Down Syndrome you also learn that Down Syndrome can come with a whole host of other SEVERE medical problems?!

            I have a family memeber who discovered her wanted child had Down Syndrome. She learned this past the 5 month/viability mark. What she also learned was that the fetus had a severe heart defect and also some sort of problem with the brain. I believe it was enlarged for some reason.

            This familly member, probably because she was so far along in the pregnancy, CHOOSE to continue a non-viably pregnancy. She CHOOSE to continue knowing the result would be a still birth. Because she wanted to hold her child and get footprints ect.

            Guess what. IF she had wanted an abortion when she found out about the defects she would not have been able to hold that baby. Because of people like you. “pro-lifers” banned the method of abortion that would allow her to remove the dead fetus and hold it.

            So yeah. Just dropping some info on you that you might want to think about instead of trying to use disabled people as props and shame women for not having the resources or will to have and/or raise a child with severe disabilities. The point is you can NEVER know someone’s story. So STFU with your shaming of stranger’s reproductive choices when you don’t know shit about them.

          • Stephanie Lastra

            I am not using anyone as props, you are the one claiming a person with a disability is not as worthy of life as other people. I aware of the increased risk of heart issues, cancer, and some other issues with DS but most people are okay and are happy to be alive even if they do develop some of these issues. Most of the heart issues are fixable or treatable. My point is saying “oh you have xyz disease and I think that would be a life not worth living, so therefore I am choosing for you to never be able to live your life” is not an excuse.

          • Mandy

            And I’M saying your “point” ignores reality and the actual thought processes of women who are terminating. Whether they are aborting a non-viable fetus with severe medical problems (see the no lungs example) OR even just a fetus with mild medical issues that will only survive a few minutes or would need a life time of professonal care and numerous surgeries, NO ONE is thinking ‘wow my wanted child’s future life is not worth living because people with medical problems are worth less than healthy abled body people.’

            Please go back and read my comment again. Please consider the severity of medical problems that develop in utero. Not all CAN be fixed, despite your denial.

            And then stop advocating that women be forced to birth children only to watch them needlessly suffer and die when they have no lungs and cannot breathe or when the have sezuires for hours after birth and then die or any other numerous problems that can happen when a fetus develops. It’s incredibly arogant of you to speak for all people with DS and claim they are all “okay and happy to be alive.”

          • Stephanie Lastra

            well I have already answered a lot of your objections in other places, but I will say this- 9 out of 10 babies diagnosed with DS in utero are aborted, and you have no issue with that? you don’t see anything wrong here? you don’t think that is a reflection of societies view of people with DS and a lack of medical community support?

          • Mandy

            [Unbias peer reviewed source needed] for your claims.

            But yeah. I’d agree it IS a problem. BUT the solution is not, as you seem to think, having the government force women to give birth against their wills.

            Just like the solution to gender selective abortions is not to place a total ban on all abortions. These problems come from the fucked up views in society. And that is where you start.

            IF women were aborting 9/10 fetuses with DS (doubtful as that can’t be determined until 20+ weeks which as you know is awfully close to the abortion cut off time unless medical problems are detected), the solutions would be more working towards educating people about DS. Working to give mothers of disabled kids cheaper, easily accessable resources and help that they need. Which leads into working for things that would help ALL mothers like advocating for better federally mandated paid maternity leave (for either parent), better laws protecting pregnant people against discrimination ect while working, ect.

            So yeah. It is a problem. But again, in the end having the state or federal goverment forcing women to give birth to a child they cannot care for mentally, physically, OR financially is NOT the answer.

            And in the end no matter my feelings on the matter the reasons any woman chooses to have an abortion are none of my business. And none of yours as well. We can only work towards changing soceities beliefs and work towards supporting the women who do CHOOSE to be mothers. And work towards ending the stigma that surrounds disabilities (mental AND physical).

          • Stephanie Lastra

            well I agree that all of those things should be implemented, and I am glad that you at least acknowledge that it IS discrimination, just like sex selection abortion. Of course I am against abortion so I don’t agree with your conclusion, but I would like for you consider that abortion does in fact have a real impact on the rest of society. Look at the massive gender disparity in parts of India and China. And think of how much less emphasis will be placed on helping mothers with children who have DS (and other disabilities) and programs to help the people themselves when the focus is shifting to “eradicating DS through earlier prenatal testing”. In other words, lets get rid of a genetic disorder by not allowing said people to be born. Wow. At least to me, I am appalled by such blatant discrimination and eugenic goals. Another person here (or was it you?) said its not eugenic, but when doctors are literally stating that their goal is to remove an entire group of people through abortion- what else can it be said to be?? So I disagree that its a simple personal choice that has no effect on everyone else.

        • tsara

          …I’m not uncomfortable with late-term abortions, even for reasons not related to the physical health of the pregnant person. The thought of pregnancy and childbirth gives me way too much body-horror and other fun brain-freaking-out things (hiding under desks, eating nothing but vodka and aloe smoothies for two days, cinching a corset to twenty inches, trying really hard to ignore the urge to attack various body parts of mine with pointy things, throwing up at the slightest provocation, etc., etc., etc.) for me to ever judge anybody’s choice to end a pregnancy in any way they see fit.

          Also, I consider abortion to be a medical procedure, and, as with most medical procedures (by which I mean, I can’t think of any procedures that are exceptions at the moment), I oppose laws telling doctors when they can and can’t do those procedures (informed consent laws being the laws that are exceptions) because I’m pretty sure the evidence shows that they just impair physician decision-making.

          And what do you mean, none of it stands up to logical reasoning? A person is, by a simplified definition (using because it reflects my intuitive understanding of the concept, wording adapted from Eliezer Yudkowsky), a being who is self aware in the sense of aware of hir own awareness. A twelve-week embryo/fetus doesn’t have the brain structures necessary for that. An eight-month fetus is closer in development to being able to meet the definition, because it still doesn’t get to do anything to the pregnant person’s body without their consent. I think that ending the immediate and ongoing suppression of one’s immune system is reason enough to use lethal force if asking nicely like a reasonable person doesn’t work.

          I mean, in most cases, at eight months, induced labour or c-section might be better options, but they won’t be in all cases.

          *off to schedule an appointment with my therapist*

      • L-dan

        Given the facade Jennifer here presents (and after checking out hir comments in the contraception mandate thread, it feels ever more like a facade), it’s meant to present them as ‘reasonable’ and draw out pro-choice views that will present unsympathetically.

        She states that she’s *for* contraception and early abortions, but oh my those late ones are horrible. They’re killing almost-babies.

        It’s really the only tool they have left; crying, “look, it’s a baby!” while ignoring all evidence that 8 month abortions only happen in life-threatening cases or gross fetal anomaly.

        • cjvg

          Also what she “forgot” to mention/picture is the pregnant woman who already is a complete fully formed cognizant and aware human. As such her wishes must superseded those of a being that does not even have the sentience ( though to do when lacking the brain development needed) to express any wishes or discomfort at all.

          Expressing concern for a potential life, while dismissing the existing life already present is at best hypocritical!

    • cjvg

      An eight month fetus can be safely removed from the woman’s body if she does no longer wish to be pregnant.
      In fact this is routinely done in America, it is called a scheduled C-section.

      If you want to be taken seriously please use coherent and relevant arguments. A more then glancing familiarity with the actual biology of pregnancy and fetal development would also be beneficial to your ability to create a useful argument!

  • L-dan

    eh…it’s not a child. Even by a generous definition of ‘child’ 80+% of abortions take place well before there is one. Closer to 90% if you go to the point of “well we can argue about it at the point of viability”.

    • Jennifer

      I certainly hope you’re right about most abortions taking place before there’s a child. Because they perform abortions up to a despicable level.

      • L-dan

        over 80% are before 12 weeks. Close to 90% are before 20. These statistics are out on Guttmacher’s website. I believe Wikipedia carries them as well.

        • dance commander

          Good lord is Jennifer an idiot.

          • L-dan

            Yep. Well steeped in every crackpot anti-abortion screed out there.

        • Kathi J

          98.5 to 99% prior to week 20. 90% by the end of the first trimester.

          • L-dan

            Thanks. I wasn’t looking it up and aiming conservative with my vaguely remember stats.

      • dance commander
      • goatini

        ALL safe, legal pregnancy terminations take place before there is a child. The End.

  • dance commander
  • dance commander

    Pregnancy is 14x more dangerous than abortion.

  • dance commander

    http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ls6w7phG8f1qi68z9.jpg

    Typical abortion, you ignorant fuckwit.

  • L-dan

    Not actually sound logic since the moral status of the individual upon which they rely is actually not the same for an organism dependent upon connection to another’s body, and an organism independent of that body. Just to toss one quibble with their base assumptions.

    Now, given the way they chose to define ‘person’, they may have an argument. But their definition of person is hardly without controversy to begin with.

    As something to argue about in philosophical circles, it’s academically interesting. But it doesn’t much speak to the realities of childbearing and rearing.

    Now, I’ll agree there are definitely situational ethics at play. There’s an entire article titled “The only Moral Abortion is My Abortion,” that illustrates it quite clearly.

  • dance commander

    What’s it like being so dumb Jennifer? Can you tell us?

    • HeilMary1

      She’s too dumb to answer.

  • goatini

    More like, deceived by someone in the billion-dollar global human trafficking adoption business, who tells them that a non-sentient product of conception should erase their civil, human and Constitutional rights, in order to enrich the coffers of the global human trafficking syndicate. $10K-$50K per adoption. THAT is the REAL “business”. When something doesn’t seem right, FOLLOW THE MONEY.

    • Jennifer

      Uh huh. Follow the money, which explains to the tee how so many in the abortion business don’t give a damn about the mother or child.

      • goatini

        $10K-50K per adoption. THAT’S where the BIG money is, and that’s why so many vicious forced-birthers want to use ignorant people like you as a dupe to keep their money flow going.

        • Cactus_Wren

          That should possibly read “per adoption of a healthy white-or-whitish newborn with a compliant and drug-free mother”. Distress merchandise — and for the adoption industry that’s just what newborns are, merchandise — goes for much lower prices.

          • HeilMary1

            Non-white infants get medically trafficked to pharmaceutical companies for drug experiments.

      • dance commander

        Childbirth costs between 24 and 40k in hospital bills. The average abortion costs around. 400$. Childbirth and adoption are more profitable

      • HeilMary1

        Catholic nuns stole AND SOLD 300,000 infants in Spain for PROFIT and to punish “politically unworthy” mothers. Imagine being told your newborn was stillborn just so greedy fascist nuns could sell it to the wealthy fascist criminals who forced you into poverty in the first place.

  • HeilMary1

    No fetus has the right to shred women’s lady parts, trigger incontinence, cancer, multiple organ failures, autoimmune diseases, strokes and death.

  • Jennifer Starr

    Well, when you get pregnant, you get to decide about your pregnancy, as you should be able to. Kindly let other women make their own choices as well.

  • goatini

    The ONLY pregnancy, and uterus, that are any of YOUR concern are YOUR OWN.

  • Ineedacoffee

    No they should be saying,
    ‘your life, your body, YOUR CHOICE
    I will keep my nose out of it as it is none of my business’

  • Arekushieru

    Who could want to *actually* kill a child if they were raping them? Fixed it for ya.

  • HeilMary1

    You’re selfish for ignoring the deadly mayhem you inflicted on your mother’s body.

  • dance commander

    http://www.mommyish.com/2013/10/29/10-reasons-to-have-an-abortion/#comment-1123653049

    Interesting discussion here, if anyone is interested.

    well not really, they are all self-righteous assholes

    I’m just insulting them tee hee

    • Ella Warnock

      Oh, get a load of this one:

      http://www-dot-jillstanek-dot-com/2013/11/janine-turner-democrats-treat-women-as-sex-objects/#comments (type in dot where there’s a -dot-)

      Wherein posters claim that a man hitting a woman is perfectly okey-dokey if she’s just told him she had an abortion. Every once in a while I kind of forget how utterly insane they are, then something like this comes up.

      “A slap in the face as a reaction is not abuse.”

      – Opines Hans Johnson.

      “Let’s see, so a husband comes home and get’s into a fight with his wife who,
      in the midst of the fight, throws open the door to the closet to reveal
      their slaughtered toddler and shouts that she killed the little *bleep*.

      – Screeches “Jespren.” Because we’ve somehow gone from hitting a woman who told you she had an abortion to killing a toddler and stuffing it in a closet. She further proposes that:

      “We have been conditioned to believe that all physicality between a man and
      a woman is automatically ‘abuse’ and we’ve had it drilled into us by
      society that ‘abuse’ is inexcusable. That is utterly nonsensical and
      illogical.”

      So, as we can see, abusing women is fine, nay, NECESSARY, if one has a “good enough” reason. You know, most of the time I can kind of gloss over a certain amount of crazy, but this is beyond the pale. And it’s exactly the sort of thinking that pushed me over into staunch pro-choice territory. If there was ever any doubt that antis are all about the “innocent babies,” these comments should put the lie to that notion.

      • dance commander

        And every year a few cases pop up where a guy has beaten his pregnant gf to death because she may or may not have brought up the subject of abortion.

        Btw, you no longer need to dot your links here. They allow us to post pix and everything now!

        • Ella Warnock

          Ah, okay, thanks dance commander, I didn’t know that. Went back in and fixed it. I really wanted it to show up because I had such a jaw-dropping reaction to what I was reading and wanted to make sure I wasn’t just seeing things!

          • dance commander

            I was reading Salon.com a few months ago and one poster said that he hopes that any woman who gets a back alley abortion (if abortion were to be made illegal) should just bleed to death as punishment for ‘murdering her baby’.

      • dance commander

        Oh my, I gotta tell you about this one. Someone earlier on mentioned that “Jennifer” and many republican women were uhm, rather privileged.

        Well, check this out, lulz:

        http://www.mommyish.com/2013/10/29/10-reasons-to-have-an-abortion/#comment-1125886024

        “So now you’re discriminating against kids who were home schooled??? What is it with you bigoted pro aborts?

        I have 2 friends who were home schooled and are graduates of Yale and Oxford.

        At any rate… no.. I went to two very exclusive private all girls schools… 2 years in France 2 years out here.”

        —————–

        If she is indeed telling the truth, the stupid bitch is living in a bubble.

        • Jennifer Starr

          Yeah, I would say that bubble is about the size of it. If she’s telling the truth, that is. This is from a post of hers (same person above) on Live Action entitled Be Countercultural, Have Babies:

          You’re obviously not as capable as some of us. We’ve taken our six kids (3 are adopted) all over Europe, and parts of Asia
          (Every year they learn a new language we take them to visit that specific country).They’re also in very exclusive private schools
          To which they are driven in either my Maserati, my husband’s Tesla or the Cheyenne etc

          My house looks like a museum (well at least the days after the maid has been there). The kids (even the younger ones) know how to behave in public and in the house. And they have each other to play with and depend on.

          Fencing, swimming, tennis, voice, piano, guitar, sax dance,martial arts, etc. All very expensive

          Not one of my kids has broken even a piece of my exclusive Louis XIV furniture, our expensive works of art and sculptures, my imports from India Thailand and Africa or my Cartier pieces that are boldly displayed in our living rooms, theatre, family room and bedrooms.Of course, they’re being brought up quite well….

          They know where they can play and where they can’t and even the younger children clean up after themselves

          I’ve always felt pity for the “only child”

          Tiffany’s? That’s the most expensive thing you have in your house having only ONE child?? How gauche.

          Truly, I have no words for this person.

          • Ella Warnock

            I remember that post. What a load of utter fantasy, or maybe it was meant to be satirical. Either way, ridiculous.

        • Jennifer Starr

          She also says that her husband ‘pays the bills with his guitar’. I’m honestly doubting the veracity of this poster–it sounds like she’s taken bits and pieces from stories of the rich and famous and mixed it all up into a dream story for herself. I’m guessing teen with a very fertile imagination? I also found a facebook page using the princessjasmine4 handle of a girl named Jasmine Andrews from Los Angeles, but the photos are not her–they’re from a teen model named Alexis Howe. No proof that this is the same girl, but it’s strange.

          • dance commander

            I’m guessing teen with a very fertile imagination?

            Agreed.

          • dance commander

            Oh, and no fucking way she has the education that she claims to have when she can’t tell the difference between ‘genitals’ and’ gentile’ and ‘conscious’ and ‘conscientious’

            She blamed ‘lack of sleep’ on her mistakes but I am not buying it. She’s a dumb bitch.

          • Ella Warnock

            I thought her whole story sounded wonky. Interesting.

        • Ella Warnock

          I’m not going to bother to find the actual thread because it’s Saturday and I’m too lazy, but she’s also the one who was claiming that pro-choicers “didn’t know how to have good sex” or something to that effect. Just, pro-choicers hate sex and don’t know how to do it, so that’s why they hate babies and motherhood and apple pie blah blah blaaahhh.

          Since she’s so very well-educated and wealthy, she must know what she’s talking about, right?

          Right.

  • Ella Warnock

    Thanks, Lily. Reference my link in my comment above – talk about some sociopathy!

    • Lily_ZzTop

      yeah, folks like Obenshain need to die early and bloody, ..and did I mention soon? And while perhaps he may be visualised as the spear tip of only the lunatic fringe… these freaks seem to be getting bolder with their lunacy as of late, thereby encouraging other numbnuts to crawl out of the woodwork. christ! this obsession with women’s bodies and their private parts and what goes in, and WHEN it goes in, what comes out, and WHEN it comes out and HOW it comes out is absolutely INSANE! thanks for that link!

  • Jennifer Starr

    Hyde Amendment. Tax dollars don’t fund abortions in the US. And why do you think that you should be able to insist that women carry unwanted pregnancies, with all the resultant risks, just to satisfy your personal morality?

  • goatini

    When forced-birthers attempt irony and satire, it always comes off as ham-handed BS.

  • dance commander

    Abortion is not funded by your tax dollars so shut the fuck up.

    And yes, you’re a heartless piece of shit because you ONLY care about fetus while it’s in the womb, you don’t give a flying fuck about the woman’s life or health, and once it’s born you whine about how your tax dollars are paying for childhood nutrition and education and medical.

  • tsara

    Would you rather pay for the NICU bills for all those babies you don’t want aborted? Because those can run into the millions of dollars each.
    Also, does your government allow conscience exemptions from their tax dollars going towards military spending? Because I’m pretty sure the US does a fair amount of murdering of actual living people.
    And it’s terrible to insist<i/ that a woman keep her child after consensual sex because consent must be given continuously for the whole time someone's body is being used. If my sex partner in consensual sex doesn't stop when I revoke my consent, that's rape. If the pregnancy doesn't stop when I revoke my consent, that's pretty fucking similar to rape.

  • Jennifer Starr

    And somewhere, Jonathan Swift is turning in his grave over this piss-poor attempt at satire.

  • dance commander

    what..the…fuck?

  • Ella Warnock

    Oh, many anti-choicers (and no, I’m not saying YOU, in particular) make a big show of NOT actually saying the words “s!ut” or “wh@re.” Then they wax on unpoetically about women “keeping their legs closed” or “quit opening their legs.”

    And we all know exactly what “kind” of woman opens her legs, don’t we? See, the words never actually need be said. The whole subject is disingenuous, to say the least.

  • Ella Warnock

    And to be fair, I find the completely specious “war” in Afghanistan and the billions spent on it – with my tax dollars and withOUT my approval or consent – to be a double standard. I’m quite generous because I know what it’s like to be alone and do without. Gee, you think maybe I could give even more if I weren’t on the hook (as a fairly high earner w/no kids, so I pay outrageous taxes) for the military to run around playing with their little toys and causing “collateral damage” to others who have little choice about what happens in their countries? And I ask this as a former military dependent, so it’s not like I have no idea what’s involved here.

    What gives your stance anymore credence than mine? I’ve been paying for war all my working life; all the thanks I get for “truly believing” it’s wrong is being called a heathen, freedom-hating liberal.

  • Ella Warnock

    Come on, admit it: You’ve been taking writing tips from Tim LaHaye, haven’t you?

  • JamieHaman

    Your assignment should you choose to accept it:
    Look up the Hyde Amendment. There is no use of tax dollars to fund abortion. BTW, when you are done doing that, go ahead and look up audits of Planned Parenthood, look up how often they happen, and look up the non existent criminal charges that do not occur, because no money is used for abortion.
    Do NOT believe me about the Hyde Amendment, or those criminal charges, or those audits of Planned Parenthood. Find out for yourself.

  • dance commander

    Well I found one such piece of shit:

    http://www.mommyish.com/2013/1

    “first, does it make you feel better to talk about aborting
    “pregnancies” instead of aborting babies? I do suppose so. lol And
    yes, I believe anyone who hires a hit man to kill someone else deserves
    life in prison at the very least.”

    I don’t even know what to say to such people. They are so off the
    wall. He is also claiming that it’s legal for women to have abortions at
    9 months and to birth healthy babies and kill them.

    • Ella Warnock

      Well, can a pregnancy be aborted or not? If it can, then you’re using the correct terminology. Calling everything a baby makes me think of this. Just throw some random shit on the wall and – voila – baby!

      • dance commander

        And don’t forget, all dogs are pit bulls!

        • Ella Warnock

          Ha, of course!

  • Jennifer Starr

    Except that what you’re doing is concern trolling, and your ‘opinions’ are not even remotely pro-choice.

  • Jennifer Starr

    It was very poor satire, and no, it doesn’t represent pro-choice views. But you’re right, it is unlike Swift’s work, because Swift actually had talent with satire.

  • Jennifer Starr

    Not really worth it–it’s the same tired old tripe we’ve seen a million times before.

  • Ella Warnock

    “point out my weaknesses”

    Okay.

    “Right, but dependence on another person by an actual physical connection, as opposed to an economic connection is an arbitrary determinant. Why is infringement on my bodily autonomy any worse that infringement on my economic autonomy.
    Certainly if someone raped me, I should be allowed to kill them. If
    someone breaks into my house and is stealing my food or money, then why should I not be allowed to defend myself by use of force? A fetus in an unwanted pregnancy is essentially a rapist, taking advantage of my own sexual organs for his own benefit. Likewise, an unwanted child, so long as the “parents” allow themselves to be victimized is essentially a thief, using their material goods for his own benefit. Consent to sex isnot consent to be pregnant. Consent to be pregnant is not consent to remain pregnant. Consent to remain pregnant is not consent to labor.
    Consent to labor is not consent to childbirth. Consent to childbirth is not consent to keep the child. And consent to keep the child is not consent to feed the child. What part of that is so hard to understand?

    And who is the government to tell me how to define ‘person’? If I
    believe personhood begins at the age of 5, why should I be required to preserve the life of some organism who isn’t even a person. I’m not saying I should be allowed to kill this kind of parasite, but I should
    certainly not be required by the government to feed it or make other special arrangements for it. That is an infringement of the government on my personal rights to privacy and is just another example of the ridiculous teabaggers shoving their moral values down our throats. My body, my property, my choice.”

    There you go.

  • Stephanie Lastra

    its just a terrible non-response to what im saying. I was a huge abortion advocate, I wrote a paper in the 10th grade defending partial-birth abortion, and never gave it a second thought until as an adult I began to look at things differently. I wish that more abortion advocates would engage in actual responses to what I am saying instead of bumper sticker slogans. Contrary to what you may think, I have put a lot of thought into my position and I don’t take it lightly because, also contrary to what you choose to believe, I DO care about women AND their babies. I care about HUMAN BEINGS, all of them.

  • choiceone

    Your most obvious weakness actually begins at the point where you speak of “an unwanted child” as a thief and “Consent to keep the child is not consent to feed the child.”

    Women have a right to give up neonates in adoption or even in some states to drop them off at centers where no questions will be asked and no prosecution be threatened. Legal motherhood is in that sense completely voluntary.

    At that point when you will or will not become a legal mother, consent to keep the child is in fact consent to feed it. If you fail to do the latter, child services can remove the child from your custody, have you declared an unfit mother, and transfer the child to someone else’s legal care.

    I personally think that a man should have the same right as a woman, to choose to say, since I don’t want the woman to continue her pregnancy with an embryo that contains my chromosomes, Since he can’t force her to have an abortion because that would be forcible control of the inside of another person’s body, there should at least be a legal way for him to renounce all rights and responsibilities for the future child.

    Your other weaknesses:

    One has to do with the fact that pregnancy physically alters and damages a body, though much of the damage can usually – but not always – be naturally repaired in time.

    Though you have the right to use force against a housebreaker stealing from you, any sane person knows that his or her body is of greater value than his or her other property, As long as your body is healthy and undamaged, you can easily use it to work to obtain other property. If it is seriously ill or damaged, however, it is quite possible that not all the property in the world can purchase its medical repair.

    Another has to do with the government’s right to define “person.” The US government implicitly defined “person” in the Constitution and its amendments. At the start, 13 states made an agreement to the implications and later territories also agreed to the implications when they agreed on statehood.

    One implication that is especially interesting is the Census, which was to count all persons (making exceptions for Native Americans who belonged technically to other nations, etc). Lots of people did not want slaves to be counted, but slaveowners in the South insisted, so even though slaves were counted as fractional persons, they were still counted from the start. This meant that ultimately no one could deny that we all agreed from the start that they were persons, a claim that could be used ultimately to support ending their slavery and all slavery. But none of the unborn were ever counted (our founding fathers knew enough not to count their chickens before they hatched).

    The majority of US citizens also agree to the government standard of, if you’re a born human being, you are a person. If you don’t like that, however, you are free to leave any time and go live in a nation that says a zygote is a citizen.

    So personhood definitions are not subjective from birth, in that legal personhood is agreed on by the democratic principle here.

    If you are pregnant, you have to deal with it either by getting an abortion or carrying to term and giving birth, and either keeping the child or making arrangements for it to be adopted (or given to a state-sanctioned drop-off center). That’s because it is inside your body and therefore is your problem and, if it comes out of your body as a person – which we agree it is when born – then you cannot just abandon that person where there are no caretakers.

    These are serious weaknesses of your logic in your post.