Experts Detail Negative Impact of Texas Anti-Abortion Law in Federal Court


Read more of our coverage on the HB 2 hearing here.

Expert witnesses testified in federal court Monday that HB 2, Texas’ omnibus anti-abortion law, has negatively affected the ability of pregnant people who live in south and west Texas to access legal abortion care. It was the first day of a new legal challenge to the law, which was passed last summer after weeks of protest brought thousands of orange-shirted reproductive rights supporters to the state capitol and made state Sen. Wendy Davis a national name following a 13-hour filibuster.

“These regulations, burdens not imposed on any other medical providers in Texas, are not consistent with medical standards and they drastically reduce the number and geographical distribution of abortion providers,” said plaintiff’s counsel Jan Soifer, representing a number of Texas abortion providers located across the state, in her opening statement.

Experts for the plaintiffs testified on a variety of issues, from the economics and logistics of building ambulatory surgical centers for the provision of abortion care, to the challenges faced by Texans who cannot afford to drive to San Antonio, Austin, Dallas-Fort Worth, or Houston, where the only abortion-providing ambulatory surgical centers which provide abortion care will be located after all four prongs of HB 2 go into effect on September 1, barring an injunction from the federal court.

But while the plaintiffs sought to demonstrate the negative impact of HB 2—forcing Texans in the Rio Grande Valley and in West Texas to travel hundreds of miles round-trip for legal abortion care—the state argued that any effect of the law was immaterial to the case as long as the legislators who passed the law had a “rational basis” for doing so.

Jimmy Blacklock, an assistant attorney general arguing for the State of Texas, said in court that the “rational basis” rule, as laid out by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans earlier this year, “makes most of the expert testimony completely irrelevant.”

As RH Reality Check’s senior legal correspondent explained earlier this year, the “rational basis” bar means that all states need to do to uphold abortion restrictions is to “claim the proposed restriction is rationally related to its stated purpose.”

Last summer, lawmakers said that HB 2’s new regulations—which restrict medication abortions, ban abortion after 20 weeks, require abortion-providing doctors to have hospital admitting privileges at local hospitals, and mandate that abortion facilities operate as ambulatory surgical centers—were necessary to protect the health of people who seek legal abortion care in Texas.

Nevertheless, the plaintiffs laid groundwork for proving that HB 2 has imposed an undue burden on low-income Texans who cannot afford to travel to major cities to obtain legal abortion care and that abortion-providing doctors in Texas have been denied the hospital admitting privileges that the law requires, forcing abortion facilities in McAllen and El Paso to close their doors.

While the trial was expected to continue until Thursday, testimony moved more swiftly than predicted, as the State of Texas declined to go into in-depth cross-examination of the plaintiffs’ expert witnesses.

“I can only conclude that our experts are really strong,” said Amy Hagstrom Miller, whose Whole Woman’s Health group of abortion providers is one of the plaintiffs in the case. In the wake of HB 2, Hagstrom Miller has closed three of her five Texas clinics, in Austin, Beaumont, and McAllen.

Lucy Felix, a state-licensed promotora who works as a liaison between women in the Rio Grande Valley and health-care providers, testified through a translator that the women she works with in the Valley often do not have the resources to find child care for existing children, ability to take time off work to travel two separate times to a central or east Texas abortion provider, or to travel hundreds of miles in search of legal abortion care.

But state attorneys did question her experience, asking her if she was a doctor or a scientist who had conducted empirical research on the impact of HB 2, or whether she had a postgraduate degree. Instead, she spoke of her education in Mexico and current work talking directly with women who live in the Valley.

“I feel like they really didn’t respect [Felix's] expertise,” Hagstrom Miller told RH Reality Check after Monday’s hearing.

Another expert, Dr. Elizabeth Raymond of Gynuity Health Projects in New York City, testified to the overall safety of legal abortion, saying that her research has found that there are 27 maternal fatalities for every 100,000 live births, compared to just .27 fatalities per 100,000 legal abortion procedures. She likened the safety of abortion care to that of colonoscopy procedures.

An architectural expert and an economics researcher testified that ambulatory surgical centers can be a costly endeavor for abortion providers, requiring an investment of at least $1 million and up to more than $3 million, depending on the extent of construction and renovation involved in converting existing abortion facilities.

George Johannes, a Missouri architect who has designed a number of abortion facilities in Virginia and Michigan, testified that it was unusual, in his experience, for states not to include a provision that would “grandfather” existing facilities into exemptions to new regulations, though Texas provides no such provision in HB 2’s language. He estimated that it would cost $2.4 million for the 3,400 square-foot Austin Whole Woman’s Health facility to expand into a 7,000 square-foot ambulatory surgical center.

Plaintiffs’ expert testimony is expected to continue Tuesday morning, while the State of Texas is expected to bring its expert defense witnesses to the stand on Wednesday. The trial could conclude by the end of this week, and Judge Lee Yeakel is expected to issue an opinion before the HB 2’s ASC provision goes into effect on September 1. Ultimately, however, legal experts told RH Reality Check that the law will likely make its way to the Supreme Court.

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

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

Follow Andrea Grimes on twitter: @andreagrimes

  • StealthGaytheist

    “These regulations, burdens not imposed on any other medical providers in Texas, are not consistent with medical standards and they drastically reduce the number and geographical distribution of abortion providers,”

    That’s exactly what the antichoicers want.

    • dudebro

      Yep.

    • Arsenio Dallas

      We are PRO-LIFE — we approve of the choice to give life over destroying it in utero with impunity!

      • StealthGaytheist

        You approve of forcing women into gestational slavery (no choice involved since you take that away). Once the woman gives birth you don’t give a shit about the “life” you were previously so vehement about.

        • RobbieT

          Liar. How many homes for unwed mothers and their children, born and unborn, have you or any of your pro-abortionists established and supported? How many orphan homes have you or any of your pro-abortionists established and supported? How many food banks have you or any of your pro-abortionists established, hosted and supported? How many pregnancy resource centers have you or any of your pro-abortionists established and supported?
          All you can do is kill, kill, kill. Kill the handicapped. Kill the inconvenient. Kill the Blacks and other children of color.
          We did not “force” females to be female. It’s a biological operation. We have little influence over what sex a child is. Except to search (usually for a female) and destroy the inconvenient.

          • fiona64

            So many histrionics, and so little substance. Congratulations!

      • J.D.

        Some choice. You’d force me to carry a rapist’s spawn and try to tell me it was all for my own good. No thanks!

        • RobbieT

          Most known pregnant rape victims carry the baby to term. And of those most keep the baby rather than put it up for adoption. A child may be that of a rapist but it is the mother’s child as well. The child is innocent of any wrong yet you want to kill, kill, kill it.

          • J.D.

            Most is not all. It’s not even close. If the woman finds it too horrific to contemplate living out her rape again every single day for the next 9 months, choses not to put her body and life, already hideously violated, at further risk with pregnancy and childbirth (pregnancy and childbirth are vastly more dangerous than a legal abortion), who choses to take NOT to forever be tied to the criminal scum who did this to her (rapists still have parental rights in many states and a woman can’t unilaterally adopt out a child even if the sight of her rapist staring back at her through its eyes makes her sick) who the heck are you to demand she do so?

            Right, Robby…you’re (likely) a male who will never, ever have to go through it so it’s easy for you to spout off.

            I want her to have a choice. You want her to have none besides gestate, gestate, gestate. Get lost and take your little prurient rape fantasies with you.

          • fiona64

            Citations needed. Thanks in advance.

          • goatini

            A rapists’ rights supporter. No surprise.

          • Arekushieru

            A fetus is not a child. Whether or not the fetus is innocent is IRRELEVANT.There is no mother involved in abortion. Thanks.

      • lady_black

        My mother had an abortion. How would you “punish” her for saving her own life?

        • RobbieT

          Punishment is the duty of the state (the government). Preventing a planned crime or a crime in progress from completion is any and everyone’s duty. Only if I was on her jury would her punishment be any of my own business.

          • lady_black

            It is NOT a crime to prefer to go on living. You will not punish her AT ALL. GFY.

          • fiona64

            Nope, Robbie. You don’t get to wiggle out on this one. What do YOU think the punishment should be for a woman who has had an abortion?

      • Jennifer Starr

        You are anti-choice. Not pro-life.

        • catseye

          It’s pro-forced-birth.

      • Respondent#124847

        BS! You are pro-FORCED BIRTH!

        • catseye

          Dang, ya beat me to it.

      • fiona64

        Oh, look; it’s anti-choice word salad dude again. You need to get a hobby and keep your nose out of things that don’t concern you.

      • cjvg

        What choice is that, do as I say or we will force you?
        No choice involved, please state what you really are, a forced birther!

        • dudebro

          cj, I showed your essay on the sentience of coma patients to the pro-life ‘philosopher’ and he basically said that you were wrong, because 1) philosophers don’t believe that coma patients are sentient, and that this is all that matters and 2) a coma patient cannot immediately exhibit sentience, and neither can an embryo, therefore neither are sentient

          /sigh

          No reasoning with dipshits.

          • cjvg

            Well then , I guess all the imaging studies on coma patients (who are not in an irreversible coma or pvs) that show activity in the cerebral cortex (the part of the brain that houses sentience) must be wrong. I could have sworn I saw it light up, but what do I know.

            In comatose patients, depending on the stage of their coma, the waveforms are altered. As the coma deepens, the EEG device will eventually show a flat line instead of a wave. When this stage is reached the patient is considered to have crossed the point between a living brain and a deceased brain. Flat line is the deepest known form of coma

            Pvs is the persistent vegetative state is in which the patient will exhibit sleep-wake cycles, and reflex movements (e.g. sucking, startle responses, grabbing), and “wakefulness” by opening their eyes but will have no cognitive or mental activity of any type. This activity is produced by intact function of the brain stem and “deeper” (i.e. subcortical) regions of the brain but there is no activity of the cerebral cortex itself. People in this form of coma are functionally brain-dead and will not show any activity in the cerebral cortex during imaging.

            http://dana.org/Publications/Details.aspx?id=43270

          • dudebro

            Thanks for the new info. bookmarked.

          • RobbieT

            We know little of when the individual becomes conscious. All we can do is scan for detectable brain waves. The “fetus” seems to “know” how to be a “fetus” from early on.

            Many creatures that have no discernible brains, even central nerve clusters, even nerves, feel, respond to stimulus, and act to capture and consume food, defend from enemies and attempt escape from greater enemies.

            At the eight cell stage of the early embryo, which is still in the fallopian tube and not implanted in the uterine endometrium, it may be divided into two four cell clusters and each can develop from the four cell stage into an individual human being. It would appear that individuality cannot be fixed at the eight cell stage but we just do not know.

            So as long as we do not know, it’s OK to kill them? It should be just as OK if you don’t know that there is a family eating dinner at table in their home, to toss a grenade in just in case there are bad guys in there.

          • dudebro

            Minds can be measured, and embryos do not have minds.

            Furthermore, fetal brains have been studied in depth, and sentience is not possible until the 26th-29th week because the thalamacortical connections do not yet exist
            http://willcov.com/bio-consciousness/front/Thalamocortical%20system.htm

            And a brainless fetus can respond to stimuli because of the brainstem, which is not necessary for sentience. Its just reflexive.

          • TheDingus

            We do know that women are conscious individuals.

            Well, some of us do, any way.

          • cjvg

            ll animals that respond to pain have discernible brains. I assume you are discussing amoebae or viruses? Yes these do not have a discernible brains, or brain waves. We also have no qualms about killing them. They do not respond to pain or are able to differentiate between pain or other stimuli.

            Spouting of obvious and clearly faulty nonsense and presenting those lies as fact does not strengthen your argument. This pathetic and insidious tactic merely illustrates that you clearly do not have the mental capacity to understand that science logic, biology, compassion, empathy and reason demand that to respect life you must respect choice

          • Jennifer Starr

            Was that Tullia again? And I’d trust a medical professional over a ‘philosopher’ any day.

          • dudebro

            Simon Jm

            He thinks that zygotes are rational because they are ‘self-directed’ teleonomically and he is the idiot who compared fetal development to that of a transformer changing from robot to car.

          • Arekushieru

            Then they must also be GUILTY since they ‘choose’ to implant into a woman’s uterus. ESPECIALLY if these people want to grant a fetus the status of person.

          • RobbieT

            My own daughter falls into what appears to be a state of coma. Unresponsive to anything. Cannot move, not even to open or close her eyelids. Cannot swallow. Only her autonomic systems keep functioning. Yet she is fully conscious and can see (if her eyelids are open), hear and feel. Her motor “comas” last from a few minutes to longer. How many people with this aflfiction have been thought dead, and buried, before modern techniques of detection of signs of life were developed?
            One man was in a motor “coma” for years. When he finally came out of it, he said that he had been conscious the entire time when he was awake. He went through normal sleep-awake cycles.
            Another was in a sensory coma for 23 (?) years, unconscious. He was not aware of anything. One day he awoke with 23 years missing from his memories.

          • dudebro

            Minds can be measured, even in people who are incapable of moving or communicating.

      • Dez

        Yea so “pro-life” we’ll put a bullet in your head and threaten women and medical personnel to prove how we love the babies. /sarc

        • RobbieT

          Same thing the government does to those they choose to enforce the law against. If they resist, they are Tased, beaten, peppered, or shot down.

      • RachelK

        Oh, please. You are fooling precisely no one.

      • DC 17

        Exactly how many children have you adopted Arsenio? I have yet to meet a single pro-life person, both male and female, who has ever adopted a child. This is extremely hypocritical behavior and suggests that what the pro-life lobby says and what it does are two completely different things.

        • RobbieT

          The ones who have adopted children rescued from abortion don’t usually go about blowing their trumpets about it. Many donate money to aid for distressed pregnant moms. Many donate clothes, food and other necessities.

          Anyway, nothing we do will be good enough to satisfy you or your fellow pro-abortionists. We opppose the “sacrament” of your “religion.”

          If we support and volunteer at homes for unwed mothers and their children, unborn and born, it’s “Why don’t you adopt them yourself?”

          If we adopt children, it’s “Why is all you can do is take mothers’ children away from them?”

          If we support and volunteer at pregnancy support centers, it’s “Why don’t you take your religion inside your churches where it belongs?”

          Then, if we do our religion inside our church buildings, you encourage others to threaten us. Of course almost all who do this are hypocrites and won’t do it themselves.

          • DC 17

            I thought I asked Arsenio a question, are you him using a different name? Or are you just some random disgruntled guy that like answering questions asked to other people? You certainly make a lot of assumptions without having any facts or evidence to back it up. I ask a lot of questions to a lot of different people in order to better understand them and their decisions in life. Like I said above, I have yet to meet a single pro-life person, either male and female, who has ever adopted a child. Are you saying that they are lying and have actually adopted children and are not willing to admit it? That would run counter to their argument, would it not? You know nothing about me or my beliefs, yet you make many assumptions.

          • fiona64

            Blah, blah, blah, blah.

      • Shan

        “we approve of the choice to give life over destroying it in utero with impunity!”

        Approve all you want. I approve of all KINDS of things people don’t do, too. That doesn’t mean I think that what I disapprove of should be illegal.

    • RobbieT

      You got it. What we really want is for the governments to uphold their own laws (constitutions) and stop denying equal protection of the law to everyone.

      • fiona64

        Oh, you invoked the 14th Amendment! Good! You see, the Constitution is very clear that rights are afforded to the *born.*

        Get it? Got it? Good.

      • Arekushieru

        Nope, you want to deny equal protection to women and grant MORE protection to fetuses. That doesn’t uphold your Constitution. Oops.

  • Kris Weibel

    Blacklock was quoted in the DMN as saying “driving distance alone to get to a clinic never constitutes a substantial obstacle, no matter how far.” This is not only ignorant of the “obstacles” but cruel and elitist. He really should apologize to the poor women for his totally blowing them off.

    • J.D.

      Okie dokey…we’ll just make sure Blacklock’s medical provider is located on the moon (the dark side.) What’s a little thing like coordinating with NASA, with assorted foreign governments, and a short rocket flight. Surely not a burden. He can even be a pioneer…maybe he can have the first cranio-rectal inversion correction surgery (outpatient) in outer space.

      • Kris Weibel

        Very good, in fact, excellent.

    • dudebro

      There was an asshat on Mother Jones who, when the travel obstacles were described to him, said that anyone living in Texas most definitely had a car, so a 3 hour drive would not be an obstacle.

      • StealthGaytheist

        Lying, stupid, or both? (It’s hard to tell some times with these people).

      • Kris Weibel

        In the Texas Rio Grande are the poorest of poor. The closed clinic to this area is 550 miles. That would be a 1 day driver there, 2 days there, due to restrictions, 1 day return. 4 days, and meanwhile, who is watching the children you might already have. Believe me, these women do not have cars, nor can they afford 4 days off work. Get a clue.

        • dudebro

          Anti-choicers have to deny that pregnancy, parenthood, the cost of contraception or even traveling to get an abortion all might be major inconveniences. Minimization of the troubles women face is the name of the game. Oh, and money grows on trees

          • fiona64

            Yep. As I’ve said before, they’re very blase about the things they force on others. They describe pregnancy as a minor inconvenience, and force major inconveniences on those seeking to terminate.

          • dudebro

            Speaking of which, Ann Morgan is eviscerating Myintx re Mathilde’s selfishness:

            http://blog.secularprolife.org/2014/04/no-i-am-not-interested-in-punishing.html#comment-1528757260

            Check Ann’s history from the same thread and read every post she is amazing. Of course, it goes straight through My’s empty head.

          • Ella Warnock

            That’s some entertaining reading. Myintx is going to start with the personal insults any day now, because that’s what she always does when it becomes clear she’s throwing random shit at the wall (incredible made-up toddler scenarios, anyone?) to see if any of it will stick.

          • dudebro

            Yeah. She usually ends up calling me a ‘sicko’ when nothing else works.

          • lady_black

            Yeah well when random toddlers knock on your door, wander onto your property, into your garage and attach themselves to your leg, that makes YOU the de facto responsible party, don’tcha know. You are duty-bound to use all your resources to make sure that toddler stays safe! I find her mildly amusing to the degree that she gets all huffy when she’s proved wrong.

          • RobbieT

            The child a woman has formed of her own DNA in her reproductive organ is not “random” and does not “wander” in from elsewhere.

            An aircrewman who finds a stowaway aboard his aircraft may not open the door and toss the trespasser out.

            A ship’s master who finds a stowaway aboard his ship must not cast the trespasser overboard but must feed him and conduct him to the next port to turn him over to the authorities.

            The law requires a motorist who comes upon an injured person on the roadway to stop and render assistance if the motorist can do so with reasonable safety. At the least he must report the find to the highway authorities at the first opportunity and not abandon the injured person (uhh, human being).

            Only if a stowaway or trespasser presents a serious and immediate danger to the life of the aircrew, ship’s crew or motorist may deadly force be used and only that amount reasonably necessary to end the threat.

            Luke 10:30 Jesus replied and said, “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among robbers, and they stripped him and beat him, and went away leaving him half dead. 31″And by chance a priest was going down on that road, and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. 32 “Likewise a Levite also, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33 “But a Samaritan, who was on a journey, came upon him; and when he saw him, he felt compassion, 34 and came to him and bandaged up his wounds, pouring oil and wine on them; and he put him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn and took care of him.…”

            Has not a woman, who generated a child of her own substance within her own body, as much responsibility toward that child as a stranger of another people has to a distressed person he finds on the highway? Or is she no better than the Jewish priest and Levite who saw, then left to die, one of their own people?

            The attitude is worse than that of a KKK who finds an injured Black lying by the roadside and goes on by, or stops and kicks him in the head. More likely the KKK would help the “n****r” despite his disgust at touching a Black and wanting never to have anything further to do with the Black once he is safe.

          • Jennifer Starr

            The law requires a motorist who comes upon an injured person on the roadway to stop and render assistance if the motorist can do so with reasonable safety. At the least he must report the find to the highway authorities at the first opportunity and not abandon the injured person (uhh, human being).

            Not actually true, no.

          • fiona64

            Robbie seems to have a lot of fact-free posts, doesn’t he?

          • dudebro

            In not one of those scenarios is anyone required to forfeit their bodily autonomy to save a life

          • catseye

            Michael Moore’s “SiCKO” was actually an excellent movie. /snark

          • RobbieT

            “Termination,” an euphemism for “kill her baby,” is more than an inconvenience for the child.
            Yes, children, and for that matter, grownups, often are quite an inconvenience. Kill ‘em all.
            Hitler thought the damn Jews, along with the Slavs, Gypsies and Blacks an inconvenience.
            Stalin thought the kulaks an inconvenience.
            Pol Pot thought the Cambodians an inconvenience.
            Mao, like the Japanese before him, thought millions of Chinese an inconvenience.

          • goatini

            As the child of a survivor, I feel compelled to tell you to go to Hell with your bullshit lies. The people who were tortured and killed in the Holocaust were actual born PEOPLE – and it is a ghastly insult against humanity to consider them worth LESS than fetuses that have never been born and lived as persons. You disgust me.

          • RachelK

            And it is so often the same people who think that having to wait one day before obtaining an assault rifle is a huge affront to their liberty.

          • RobbieT

            The usual waiting period for an assault rifle is six months to a year. The ATF is in no hurry to approve transfers of NFA firearms.

          • fiona64

            You’re just a big ol’ bundle of fact-free, aren’t you?

            http://smartgunlaws.org/waiting-periods-policy-summary/

            To summarize, there is no Federal waiting period. As soon as a background check is completed, the weapon can be transferred. If the background check is not completed within 3 days, the sale is considered completed by default. In those states that have enacted *longer* waiting periods, the lengthiest one is 14 *days.*

            No love, a gun owner in favor of sensible gun control laws

  • StealthGaytheist

    Texas has a vested interest in making sure babies are born, full stop. They do nothing to enhance the lives of born humans and brag about the fact that they execute more people than any other state in the nation.

  • goatini

    Since any and all safe, legal pregnancy terminations are at least 13x safer than any and all full-term pregnancies, the above comment is a pure load of BS.

    And since females are not property of the State, the State has no right to impress females into gestational slavery against their will.

  • J.D.

    If Texas wants more bodies born, then they ought to employ carrot techniques, not the omnipresent stick. No woman owes it to the state to reproduce. Not. Ever. The state, however, can employ incentives to entice people to believe breeding is a good thing. Let them get creative with jobs (need a good one to support multiple little bundles of joy), educational opportunity, tax incentives, etc.) Forcing gestation and parenthood on the unwilling is just coercive BS and beyond the pale.

  • Jennifer Starr

    Using big words does not make you seem more intelligent, Mr. Green–especially when you don’t seem to be capable of using them correctly.

  • P. McCoy

    The evil and spiritual carnage going on are the acts of anti choice domestic terrorists, who harass clinics and patients at will up to and including committing acts of terror (destruction of private property, as well as physical violence and murder) over other people’s medical decisions that are none of their business. Their goal is to overthrow our government and establish a theocracy that would be similar to an Islamic one in what really matters-control over women and control over what you read, think,see and say. It will take a Constitutional amendment that puts an end to unbridled “religious liberty,” a euphemism now for forced theocratic control over the body politic.

  • Dez

    Ahh a religious fanatic trying to impose his nonsense on others. You know this country is not a theocracy right?

  • fiona64

    It is *so* easy to be an anti-choice male, isn’t it? After all, you just wave your big dumb paw and pronounce that women should be forced to risk life and health to gestate … knowing that you will never be impacted by the health risks inherent in gestation. That’s very convenient for you.

    • fiona64

      Reply to John Trenter, in moderation:

      So much sanctimony, so little substance. But you did a fabulous job of proving my point. Bravo.

  • fiona64

    Since pregnancy is 14 times more dangerous than abortion (the stats have been provided to you repeatedly), please let me know when you plan to outlaw pregnancy. After all, it’s all about patient safety with you, right?

  • RachelK

    Have you ever talked to any young people who weren’t raised in your cult? The “next generation” is completely over your bullshit. Also the people on the Supreme Court are a couple generations back, hardly the “next generation”. The last 40 years did not include an increase in abortion, just an increase in legal, safe abortion. There has always been, and will always be, women who end unwanted pregnancies. All the data shows that where abortion is illegal, there are, actually, MORE abortions happening. Generally because banning abortion goes hand in hand with reactionary policies that cause more unwanted pregnancies. You know, poor sex ed, no access to contraception. Women find a way. We, as a society, decided that that way shouldn’t involve so much death. We decided that women being forced to blow some gross old dude in exchange for an abortion was unacceptable. The evil, and the spiritual (and physical) carnage comes from denying women access to abortion. That’s the world we used to live in and you want to take us back there so you can pat yourself on the back about “life”. If you want fewer abortions, join us on the pro-choice side, because we are the ones who support policies that actually lead to fewer abortions happening. If that’s what you really care about you are on the wrong side. The data is there. If after looking at that data, you remain on the so-called, pro-life side, you reveal yourself as a hypocrite, who cares about controlling women, not about life at all.

    • RachelK

      Reply to the John Trenter comment awaiting moderation: “All studies”? Citation desperately needed. Propaganda from operation rescue doesn’t count. The study needs to be peer reviewed, etc. Also, it is hilarious that you accuse me of distorting facts while flat out making up your own facts about me.

  • Shan

    “States want and need humans to populate their borders.”

    “States need younger people to grow up alongside older people and replace them upon the latter’s death.”

    ROFL! If Texas needs more humans within its borders, there’s an assload of them banging at the door right now, eager to be let in. Oh, and Texas could keep more of its current population alive and healthy if Perry would allow the Medicaid expansion.

    • Arekushieru

      Yup. And typically, they are the people that OPPOSE immigration. These people are SUCH hypocrites.

      • RobbieT

        B-but they’re Cath-o-licks! An’, and, Messicans! We’uns don’t want OUR state to become a Cathlick Messican province.

        • Arekushieru

          Nope, that’s what your ilk likes to say. So sorry. Everyone but Catholics out of the country.

  • lady_black

    “Texas has a vested interest in having babies gestating in Texas be born in Texas.”
    REALLY sir? Well in that case, it’s a good thing that Texas cannot stop people from LEAVING TEXAS. Yep, that’s right. There is nothing to keep gestating women (or anyone else) within Texas state lines. What do you propose? Checkpoints? Armed guards? That wall you people keep whining about, IMHO should probably be built around Texas to keep your misery from affecting the rest of us. Of course, we will evacuate all women who wish to be evacuated first, and bring them to sane states. That way, you people can all be armed to the teeth and proceed to shoot each other. Problem solved.

    • RobbieT

      As long as they don’t go across the southern border. Mexico may not care about Mexicans emigrating to Texas or Guatemalans and Hondurans passing through Mexico but they sure do care about Texans and other United Staters emigrating to Mexico, unless they’re rich, of course.

      • Arekushieru

        Gee, I wonder why? Because they have enacted the same policies against Mexicans, perhaps? Btw, my cousin is currently engaged, here, in Canada, to a beautiful girl from Mexico. But, thanks for proving that you’re against immigration, as long as it’s just into the United States and not anywhere else.

  • J.D.

    The God of the Universe? Which god is that? Allah? Odin? Zeus? Mithras? Ra? Para Brahman? Ahura Mazda?

    You know nothing of fiona64’s actions and less yet of her religious beliefs, if any, yet you would gleefully impose your version of a theocracy (undoubtedly patriarchally and Abrahamic-based) on her and every other woman you seek to control. As she said, it’s very easy to be anti-choice MALE and demand things from women you will never be called on to yourself provide. However, women as a whole, and non-believers in particular, have no reason to buy into your mythos any more than they ought to believe that Superman really exists and fell from space to save us all. Take your demands for womanly ‘godly restraint’ and shove ‘em where the sun don’t shine.

    And while you’re at it, keep your religious claptrap off my and other women’s reproductive organs. We can figure out for ourselves what to do (or not) with them. We really don’t need some man telling us.

  • J.D.

    *ding-dong* Do you have a few moments to talk about our mighty goddess and savior Inanna?

    • fiona64

      Isis, Astarte, Inanna. Hecate, Demeter, Kali. — A segment from one of my favorite chants (I wish I could find the tape).

      • catseye

        Isis; Astarte; Diana; Hekate; Demeter; Kali; Inanna.
        Blessings, sister, and happy Lammas.

        • fiona64

          I *knew* I forgot one. :-/ BB, and MM.

  • goatini

    No babies involved in a safe, legal pregnancy termination.

  • goatini

    //Did I ever say the word theocracy? I don’t have to because my big God rules sovereign over the whole world//

    That’s a theocracy, dumbass.

  • goatini

    // my best female friend is so very loving and practices godly restraint//

    Tell us more about Rosie.

  • goatini

    No babies involved in safe, legal pregnancy termination.

  • Jennifer Starr

    The only pregnancies you get to make decisions about are the ones you gestate yourself.

    • Jennifer Starr

      To Mr. Trenter in moderation. Murder is illegal, therefore it is the business of law enforcement. And abortion is not murder. As to bullying, that’s what you do when you try to insert yourself and your valueless opinions into women’s private medical decisions.. And as for divorce, yes–it may shock you to hear this, but the only divorce you get to make a decision about would be your own. If you actually think that other couple’s divorces are your business you have serious problems.

      • dudebro

        It’s amazing how many fucknuts don’t know the meaning of the word ‘murder’

        There is a thread on Mother Jones about whether or not PL’ers truly believe that abortion is murder, and most of the delusional fucknuts there are arguing that yes, it is murder, because ‘killing a living being = murder’. FFS

  • Jennifer Starr

    Your best female friend? She’s inflatable, right?

  • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

    Thank you, dear merciful God, for 40 years and more of safe legal medical contraception and abortion. Praise your holy name.

    • RobbieT

      I apologize to all you pagans for the bad behavior of many professed “Christians,” who too often “have given great occasion to the enemies of the LORD to blaspheme.”
      Look to Jesus and not to His flawed professed followers. He, not they, will be your Judge.

  • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

    Support for legal abortion has been more than 50% of Americans constantly for more than 40 years.
    Now it seems support may be growing.
    http://health.usnews.com/health-news/family-health/womens-health/articles/2011/07/26/americans-show-rising-support-for-abortion-rights-poll

  • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

    Jehovah is a proabort. Aborion is a sacrament. Hosea 13:16.

    • RobbieT

      I apologize to all you pagans for the bad behavior of many professed “Christians,” who too often “have given great occasion to the enemies of the LORD to blaspheme.”
      Look to Jesus and not to His flawed professed followers. He, not they, will be your Judge.

      • fiona64


        for the bad behavior of many professed “Christians,”

        Such as yourself? Rabbi Yeshua wouldn’t recognize his words in your mouth.

      • Arekushieru

        You mean, like you do? Calling us pagans is an insult when you really don’t know who you’re talking to, btw.

  • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

    You come anywhere near my babies, Perverino, in real life and I will introduce you to Mr. Glock.

  • fiona64

    The current generation in all studies

    Kindly cite some of these alleged studies.

  • fiona64

    I suggest you look up the meaning of theocracy, tiny man.

  • fiona64

    Seek psychiatric help for your delusions. Seriously.

  • dudebro

    Zygotes embryos and fetuses are not babies. And whether or not they are vulnerable is irrelevant. Vulnerability does NOT give anyone or anything the right to intimately violate the body of another.

  • dudebro

    You sound fanatical.

  • dudebro

    Still waiting for those citations, fucknut.

  • dudebro

    Overturning RvW wont’ make abortion illegal, dumbass. It will still be legal in all of the blue states. Women will just have to travel. And they will be able to order abortion pills online. So you can suck it.

    • dudebro

      John Trenter wrote:

      You would fit right in with ISIS and all the terroristrs around the
      world who hate people and God and love power of the self. You would have
      been in Germany a loyal brownshirt or gestapo lackey of his, I am sure
      in hating vulnerable Jews or whoever else you hate with your filthy
      mouth and actions.

      Cool. That is definitely not a hyperbolic non-sequitur by any means. Fruitbat.

      • Arekushieru

        No, of course not. Besides, Hitler was just as anti-choice as Mr. Trenter. He was also CATHOLIC. And, up until Conservatives decided that they could use Pro-Jewish sentiments against Muslims, they were the biggest hatemongers against Jews, and would have been even MORE likely to be a loyal brownshirt or gestapo. Glad Mr. Trenter, here, is proving that with his Anti-Islamic sentiments. Poor widdle HIM!

        • RobbieT

          Hitler wasn’t much of a Catholic, having churches wrecked, priests killed and nuns evicted. The Vatican eventually realized that they made a mistake in trying to appease Mr. Schicklgruber.

          • Arekushieru

            So? He was still Catholic. And he, just like your ilk, punishes those who support women and minorities. OOPS>

  • P. McCoy

    A fetus/blastocyst/embryo/zygote is not a sentient baby so I’m not killing anyone. As for terrorism, well I guess you think that those who fight to rid themselves of parasites are ‘terrorists’ as well-well,lots of guys believe that they’ve Napoleon and the correct course is to ignore them. As for caring for others, it can be done without trying to meddle in their own personal Medical decisions ie; abortion. By the way, how many children have You adopted, forced birther?

  • Jennifer Starr

    I think you have an extremely vivid imagination.

    • goatini

      He beats off to rape porn.

  • Jennifer Starr

    Wow. Can’t you just feel that Christian love?

  • Jennifer Starr

    Touchy, touchy. Why don’t you want to tell us more about Rosie?

  • Jennifer Starr

    you have no capacity to figure out much of anyyhing because are obviously mentally ill and bitter to the core.

    This is what is commonly known as projection, John. But you need just a touch more hysteria to make it truly entertaining.

  • fiona64

    Could someone parse this incoherent mess for me? My fundamentalist-nutter-to-English decoder ring is broken.

  • fiona64

    Let’s discuss why you think you have the right to make medical decisions (without being a physician, yet!) for total strangers. Talk about having a screw loose!

  • fiona64

    Everyone, open your hymnals to page 22. John Trenter will now lead us in singing the chorus of “One in the Spirit.” Everyone: “And they will know we are Christians by our love, by our love. They will know we are Christians by our love.”

  • fiona64

    Someone’s a little sensitive about his Inflate-a-Date, I think …

  • fiona64

    Your fantasy life is rich and varied, I’ll give you that much …

  • fiona64

    Citations needed. For all of it.

  • Jennifer Starr

    I wouldn’t let quack Carson anywhere near me. From what I’ve seen of him, his screws are loose.

    • RobbieT

      You call the anti-gun Carson a “quack”? He is one who wants to take all those right-wing mentally-ill wacko religious fanatics’ guns away from them and you insult him?
      I agree that his screws are loose but not for the same reason(s) you do.

      • Jennifer Starr

        Yes, the term quack is still what I’m going for. And his screws are loose in so many ways.

      • Arekushieru

        Why are you so ableist? What do you have against the mentally ill? Sorry to say, but more mentally ill people have been hurt by neurotypical people than the reverse. Oops.

  • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

    God is not your bully boy.
    And Jehovah the god of the Bible is a proabort. Hosea 13:16.
    Which God are you referrring to?

    • RobbieT

      Doesn’t matter if He is. He reserves that prerogative to Himself. He is the Creator, we the creatures. He can do with us as He pleases. Don’t like it? Tough. Get with the program or it’s:

      “But those My enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring here, and slay them before Me.”

      Not little me that makes these threats/warnings. I only can relay them to you for your edification.

      • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

        You did not answer my question. Which god are you referring to?

      • fiona64

        I have more than a little trouble believing that Yahweh requires an impotent jerk like you to be his mouthpiece.

      • Jennifer Starr

        You’ve made plenty of threats here.

      • goatini

        It’s hilarious when the “religious” nutters have nothing left except to make dire threats on behalf of their imaginary abusive big bully Sky Daddy.

      • Arekushieru

        Oh, yes, so Pro-LIFE of you and your ‘God’. And it’s funny hearing someone who will likely never have to experience the same horrors of having their bodies co-opted against their will as females must do, trivializing the very emotional and devastating consequences that come from them, then saying they CARE about others. You are SICK.

  • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

    You contradict Jesus. These are the rules about abortion Jesus followed:

    Jewish law not only permits, but in some circumstances requires abortion. Where the mother’s life is in jeopardy because of the unborn child, abortion is mandatory.

    An unborn child has the status of “potential human life” until the majority of the body has emerged from the mother. Potential human life is valuable, and may not be terminated casually, but it does not have as much value as a life in existence. The Talmud makes no bones about this: it says quite bluntly that if the fetus threatens the life of the mother, you cut it up within her body and remove it limb by limb if necessary, because its life is not as valuable as hers. But once the greater part of the body has emerged, you cannot take its life to save the mother’s, because you cannot choose between one human life and another. – Judaism 101

    • RobbieT

      Where do you get this “potential” human life idea? From Harry Blackmun, maybe? You know he was a right-winger appointed by (gasp!!) Nixxon! He even said, on being questioned about the “fundamental constitutional right” he and his concurring Supremes had “discovered” in the “emanations” of the “penumbras” of the Constitution, that it was not a “fundamental” constitutional right but a “limited” fundamental constitutional right.
      “Limited” here is lawyer-speak for “limited to the specific facts and arguments submitted to the Court.” If you will read and study Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton (decided concurrently), you will find him pointing out the deficiencies of the arguments made by the attorneys, particularly those of Henry Wade (Dallas County DA) and his successor, Robert Flowers, then the “pro-life” amici curiae.
      If you even care, read Roe at note 49 in the text and footnote 54.
      He intimated that if the argument I refer to as the “Bill of Attainder” argument had been ably presented that the decision just might have gone the other way. So by lawyer incompetence (deliberate?) the government comes down against life and for death in this matter.

      • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

        If you read what a posted, you would know where I got the idea. If you are not going to read my responses, no point in continuing the conversation.

      • Arekushieru

        Nope, they came down on the side of life for the WOMAN and against her death. But, of course, woman matter so little to you, that you hold fetuses in higher favour than them. Also, if the courts had more ably decided the Roe vs Wade decision, the United States would have found women just as equal under the law as the Canadian constitution recognizes them. As of now, however, it has permitted misogynists like you to run amok.

  • Arekushieru

    Sorry, ignorant ASS. But I have had fewer pregnancies (AND abortions, because, yes, they, too, have had abortions. AW) than even most Pro-LIFE women. Oops. Cause I had exactly zero.

    If my mother hadn’t had an abortion my sibling would literally NOT be here. Oops. But a Pro-‘Lifer’ like you cares nothing for THEIR life. Fortunately, my Pro-CHOICE mother DOES.

    Abortion isn’t murder or killing and doesn’t involve babes. ASS.

    Btw, YOUR side likes to lie and distort facts. PLUS, your side wants to ENSURE that women take more sexual ‘responsibility’ than any other human population. That’s not ‘responsibility’, that’s just misogyny. OOPSIES?????

    • Arekushieru

      To John Trenter’s reply in moderation: Even though you say it is folly to answer a fool, I’m not answering a fool because I want to talk to them (you, to be more precise, but thanks for admitting you are one!), I am doing so because I don’t want other women who come on here seeing your hateful, illogical trash-speaking MISOGYNY left unanswered.

      Please do tell me how abortion is murder when it is DESCRIBED as unlawful killing with malice aforethought, and abortion is LEGAL AND it is merely the termination of a PREGNANCY (the implantation into the uterus, ipso facto, NOT the fetus) AND the cause of death (thus, what killed the fetus) was simply incompatibility with life upon separation from the uterus (anything OTHER than that and you are blaming a woman for having a uterus, MISOGYNIST) AND a woman doesn’t intentionally get pregnant to have an abortion (if she did she could easily get pregnant on demand and there would be NO infertile woman, EVER) AND a woman can have an abortion to keep a fetus with severe genetic abnormalities from suffering (unlike YOU, who are happy to see a baby suffering, simply because YOU are not the one who IS suffering. Also, if abortion was done with malice, then it would happen ALL the time, not just SOME of the time. Oops)? Women are simply accessing their right to determine WHO uses their body and when and HOW it is used, via ongoing, informed and explicit consent, REGARDLESS of level of dependency, JUST as anyone ELSE may do.

      I am asexual, ASS. I haven’t even MASTURBATED, let ALONE had sex with another partner. I HATE the idea of being pregnant, so I will never undergo artificial insemination OR in vitro fertilization treatments. So, how COULD I get pregnant or have an abortion, IGNORAMUS????

      If my mom hadn’t had an abortion, she could not have conceived my sibling. Because the fetus in the abortion would have been born AFTER the date of my sibling’s CONCEPTION. Oops?

      Those who often like to lie and distort facts often engage in projection. Just like you did. How is forcing women to engage in sex only for procreation, while letting their male counterparts engage in it however they like because their biology does not result in an easily enforceable action like pregnancy after sex, NOT qualify as asking women to take more ‘sexual responsibility’ fucking ASS?

      Finally, as I have SAID, I AM Christian, and, unlike you, a true PRACTICING Christian.

      • RobbieT

        The usual argumentum ad hominem assault by “Liberals,” “Progressives” and Pro-Abortionists.
        Um, how is killing a child caring for it?
        If your mom had not killed (or hired a killer to kill it) the sibling she aborted, so that your sister would not have been conceived, this sister would never have existed. The exact sperm would not have met the exact ovum that prodiuced your sister.

        • fiona64

          Oh, there it is, The existential angst that is at the bottom of every anti-choice argument has now been revealed.

          Most of us outgrow that at puberty.

  • Arekushieru

    Fetuses aren’t ‘vulnerable’. You know who pregnancy DOES make vulnerable however? WOMEN. By suppressing their immune systems. And, women are either more precious than non-existent ‘babies’ or you care nothing about more VALUABLE lives and you are a misogynist. …Scratch that. You ARE a misogynist. So much for your PROTESTATIONS.

  • Arekushieru

    Your greed to have others labour for you as you WISH them to labour (since you will never be forced to labour as they do by mere VIRTUE of being a VALUABLE MENZ) which is a fucking SIN. Go repent.

    And murder is ILLEGAL. Grab some fucking reading comprehension!

  • Arekushieru

    Yeah, but when she doesn’t ‘put out’, you’ll be one of the first ones to label her a ‘cock-teaser’. That’s what you right-wing not actual PRACTICING Christians do, after all.

  • Arekushieru

    I have. You, however, seem to be in need of doing so.

  • Arekushieru

    You’ve already laid it out for us, ignorant ass.

    So we should blame God for human error? You have just committed ANOTHER sin. Not a very good practicing Christian, ARE you?

  • Arekushieru

    Nope, but you would, however. Making abortion illegal denies women bodily autonomy rights equal to those of their counterparts. Denying women bodily autonomy rights is comparable to making rape and sex-trafficking legal. So, thanks for admitting the TRUTH, now. You’re just a misogynist.

  • catseye

    It’s in obvious need of a recto-cephalectomy.

  • catseye

    IOW: No woman will touch you with a 10-foot pole.

  • catseye

    No. Abortion FREES women from forced birth, which IS sex slavery.

  • goatini

    Actually, gestational slavery exploits innocent victims and seizes their issue by coercion to sell in the billion-dollar global human trafficking adoption crime syndicate.

    Safe, legal pregnancy termination allows innocent women with unwanted pregnancies to get their lives back – instead of their lives, souls, spirits, bodies, and hearts being ruined forever by gestational slavery against their will.

    Hope this clears your BULLSHIT nonsense lies up for you.

  • goatini

    Go play with your RealDoll.

  • goatini

    Take your mentally ill obsession with your abusive imaginary Sky Daddy and go play with your RealDoll.

  • goatini

    Someone is in need of his medication.

  • goatini

    I knew Carson was a creep, thanks for filling us in.

  • goatini

    You’re the most self-absorbed POS and vicious bully posting here.

  • goatini

    More like, all over the country FAKE “clinics” are set up by mentally ill “religious” nut jobs, pretend to offer “medical services”, and are run completely TAX-FREE, mooching off of innocent citizens for their wretched useless existence, raking in PILES of tax-free CA$H, all without oversight, all to line the pockets of vicious, lying radical theocratic misogynist bullies who get pleasure and fun from exploiting innocent female citizens into gestational slavery to sell the slave-labor-produced issue for BIG tax-free CA$H to the tune of 5 figures, via the billion-dollar global human trafficking adoption crime syndicate.

    There, fixed your lying BULLSHIT for you. No need to thank me.

    • RobbieT

      Name one:

      Fake clinic

      Mentally ill founder of said fake clinic

      Tax-free like any other nonprofit – so?

      Name one “vicious, lying radical theocratic misogynist bullies who get pleasure and fun from exploiting innocent female citizens into gestational slavery to sell the slave-labor-produced issue for BIG tax-free CA$H to the tune of 5 figures, via the billion-dollar global human trafficking adoption crime syndicate.”

  • goatini

    Asshat Trenter in moderation:
    //You are a pathetic sinner in need of salvation beyond what you can ever imagine. Repent and come to Him if your logic has any semblance of sanity left!//

    Truth hurts, and your butthurt is utterly delicious. (He didn’t like the factual expose of fake “clinics” and what a big taxpayer scam they are.)

  • RobbieT

    The Supremes won’t do it because no “clean” case will come before them. No state will remove all distinction between the born and the unborn. They all in varying phraseology say that “murder” applies only to “human beings who are alive AND HAVE BEEN BORN.” (sorry no italics, underline or bold available) This emphasized phrase is the “Bill of Attainder” prohibited by the US Constitution and many of the States’ constitutions that no government, federal or state, will uphold and enforce.

  • RobbieT

    The young people, still fornicating, though not as promiscuously, are not killing their babies nearly as much as a couple of decades ago.

    Yes, John Trenter, please give refs for the studies you cite.

  • RobbieT

    Never mind:

    Romans 1:28 “And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips, 30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving [Gk. WITHOUT NATURAL AFFECTION], unmerciful; 32 and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them.”

    • fiona64

      Oh, sweetie. Did you really want to try using Saul of Tarsus to justify your desire to murder pro-choicers?

      That’s not very “Christian” of you.

    • Arekushieru

      You have no natural affection for women. PLUS you just described yourself in that quote.

  • TheDingus

    The God of the Universe I know gives human beings free will. God sent Jesus here to stand for all manner of people, including women, including adulterous women, and women said to be prostitutes, who “magically” didn’t have lots of children. Yet neither God nor Jesus ever said one word about women being required to give birth. Not one.

    Jesus did say that you who are without sin, throw the first stone. Far as I can tell, you have a large pile of stones and love throwing them at women.

  • TheDingus

    “Texas has a vested interest in having babies gestating in Texas be born in Texas.”

    WTF?

    You know who else had a “vested interest” in having a larger population? Mao Zedong. Therefore, he outlawed abortion and rewarded women who produced lots of babies, calling them “hero mothers.” Fast forward a few decades and China had more people in it than it could actually feed. Whoops. Then, China had a “vested interest” in having a smaller population, so they instituted anti-birth policies, sometimes literally forcing women to abort wanted pregnancies, and forcibly sterilizing others.

    You know who else had a “vested interest” in increasing the population? Adolf Hitler, who outlawed abortion as one of his first official acts. He too rewarded women who produced lots of babies. Well, some women. Others, he forced abortion on, if not simply killing them and their born children outright, by the millions. See, his “vested interest” was only in certain kinds of babies.

    You know who else had a “vested interest” in increasing the population? Nicolai Ceausescu of Romania, who, like you, believed the fetus was the property of the state. Before he was done, thousands of women had died, thousands more babies had died (since not every forced pregnancy results in a healthy infant, especially when the mother is starving) and tens of thousands of unwanted children were warehoused in state-run “orphanages.”

    That’s what happens when the State has control over individual’s rights to liberty, you dolt. Luckily, in America, whatever the “vested interest” Texas has in controlling their population’s personal life choices, that “interest” does not trump the inalienable Constitutional rights of the citizens of Texas.

    BTW – there are no valid reasons for OB/Gyns who perform abortions to need admitting privileges in the first place.

  • goatini

    //No truth in you, just repetitious boredom and immature vocabulary. //

    I’m old enough to be your mother, pay more in taxes per year than you earn – and I don’t project my intellectual shortcomings on the innocent opposition by making ridiculous, baseless accusations about “immature vocabulary”. You know, seeing as YOU are the one who makes up non-existent words to attempt to make your BS hyperbole putatively more “credible”.

  • goatini

    Unlike you, Jesus liked women.

  • Jennifer Starr

    Hooray for Hollywood! Snap! Crackle! Pop! It’s Miller Time!

  • Arekushieru

    More likely that she works than someone like you. Y’know, rich Conservative fundamentalist types who expect everyone ELSE to do the work FOR them???

  • Arekushieru

    Planned Parenthoods provide FAR more services when just compared to abortion services. So, if a clinic that prevents higher numbers of abortions than the entire Pro-Life movement could ever drum up within their entire lifespan by providing wellness supports for pregnant woman who live in poverty, contraception and comprehensive sex ed, provides breast exams and screenings, provides information on STIs, etc,,, is an ‘abortuary’ then it is also a Contraceptuary, Sex Educary, mammuary, STInfecuary, etc…. Oops. But thanks for finally ADMITTING that.

    Nope, you try to ensure that Planned Parenthood clinics jump through more hoops than what every other clinic has to do. You do realize that Planned Parenthood is non-profit, right? And you ALSO realize that the risks of surgeries provided by clinics that offer other services that are often compared to clinics that provide surgical and medical abortions in an attempt to equate the need for BOTH, not just the former (if applicable), to acquire admitting privileges, are MUCH higher than the risks of surgery for an abortion, right? RIGHT? Therefore, you are comparing apples and oranges.

    YOU are the one in need of salvation. Selfishness is not a sin. GREED is, however. And you have demonstrated the pinnacle of greed when you compel women to sacrifice their health and lives to give birth so that you may live as you wish to live, without requiring even a MODICUM of reciprocal sacrifice, yourself. REPENT, SINNER. I won’t ask that you do so before your logic has no semblance of sanity left, because, it is apparent WITHIN your ramblings, that sanity had left it’s good ol’ friend logic behind LONG ago.

  • Arekushieru

    So, fetuses are more precious to you than the women in your community. You obviously care nothing about women. No babies or killing involved in abortion. Typical.

  • Arekushieru

    No, see, it’s YOUR ilk that whines and moans about Islamic ‘terrorism’. And, we care about WOMEN over the contents of their uterus. It is really too bad that you don’t seem to care about women other than, as YOU put it, the concerns of (women) you might (a BIG might, there) care about yourself. You see the only one who needs help to step out his (self-imposed) self-enclosure is yourself. Why? Because the God you worship, Satan, is holding you there. (But that kind of projection is something that typically only Pro-Lifers do.) Makes you a REALLY big-hearted person, doesn’t it, to strip vulnerable women of their rights, just as it would make us really BIG-hearted to LET other people take it from them, now WOULDN’T it? Again, abortion does not involve babies and killing nor are fetuses VULNERABLE. They suppress a woman’s immune system to keep her body from attacking the fetus. OOPS. So, in conclusion, and by YOUR logic, it is YOUR ilk that are the reason for why the world has its many problems.

  • Arekushieru

    Selfishness isn’t wrong. Greed, however, is. And YOU are an EXEMPLARY demonstration of why that IS. You have proven over and over that you care nothing about women. THAT is TRAGIC. Murder is comparable to abortion illegal. So is bullying of others. OOPS?

  • Arekushieru

    Your views on men obviously release you from any responsibility to women (in your life, though I shudder to think of what poor, sad creatures you’ve made of them, OR in general). God was not a misogynist like YOU. You know who WAS? Satan. If, by loving, you mean caters to your every whim because she has been beaten and downtrodden to the point where she has no existence outside of them, I would believe that, but not loving as I interpret it, because anyone who wants to strip other women of their rights and freedoms can in NO way be described as loving or practicing ‘godly’ restraint.

  • Arekushieru

    Your IDEA of ‘godly’ restraint is an abomination to God who is NOT a misogynist, like YOU. God hasn’t spoken to anyone since the ending of the NT. What you have described are actually commonly known as delusions. But, how is it that it is someone’s fault that they they do not know someone who hasn’t spoken to them, much LESS when they rejected any such implication as HAVING been done to them as the delusion it IS? Mentally ill people (like myself) can and HAVE exhibited more compassion and intelligence than your fanatical fundamentalist types have EVER been able to muster. Stop being ableist. So, you’re saying we should blame God for the fact that ONLY women are required to give up their bodies in such a manner that pregnancy demands, even though, like I said, before, that is a SIN AND the only ones who require such demands SOLELY from women are misogynists such as yourself? Boy, you people sure can’t take responsibility for your own actions, even though you require it from everyone else, now, CAN you?

  • Arekushieru

    So pro-LIFE of you (and ‘non’-ableist). Contradict yourself much, btw?

  • Arekushieru

    No, that’s YOUR ‘little’ life, after all it only exists to marginalize, stigmatize and shame women, FURTHER, doesn’t it, ‘little’ misogynist?

  • Arekushieru

    Uh, no, you’re the one who lacks reading comprehension and should come to Jesus. Granting fetuses more rights than anyone born, especially women, is NOT treating them as less than fetuses? Wow, you people are so proud of living in your bizarro world, aren’t you?