Can We Do Abortion Next?

The Next Big Fight — Bryan Lambert Memo to America: CAN WE DO ABORTION NEXT? First, the good news. We're winning the gay marriage thing. It'll still be a while before you can get gay-married in Alabama, but we have clearly reached a tipping point that four years ago I would have said we were about six years away from. Obviously we need to keep fighting. So as we collectively have to spend less and less progressive energy on this cultural issue, I'd like to propose we put that energy into a long-neglected cultural issue: abortion. Because we're losing on abortion just as surely as we're winning on gay marriage, and we really, really don't want to lose on this one. And the main way we're losing? Republican new-found love of regulation. Conservatives go on and on about "job-killing regulations", and there's an aspect truth to that. You can in fact over-regulate a business out of existence, and so a number of southern states have imposed or are trying to impose epic, onerous regulations to try to close down their states' few remaining abortion clinics. Alabama is the latest to try this. There are five whole places to get an abortion in Alabama, which, for the Bible Belt, is a lot. If my research is right, that's as many as we have in Minnesota. The same type of regulation may well close the only abortion clinic in all of Mississippi. Basically, the trick is to require a board-licensed physician with admitting privileges at a local hospital present for every abortion. Neither precaution is necessary, especially the latter one. Getting admitting privileges is complicated and costly, and there's nothing stopping hospitals from denying those privileges just because they don't like abortion. But the regulations SOUND helpful, and that's the sneaky part. Like many things in the world, this is largely the fault of weak-ass Democrats from the last two decades. It's long past time we stopped being ashamed of abortion and started embracing it. The "legal, safe and rare" line sounds good on paper, but it maintains the stigma on abortion that keeps doctors from learning to perform them, medical facilities from wanting to provide them, and women from being able to have them. Abortion is a method of birth control. It's an effective method of birth control. It's a perfectly valid method of determining when and if you will have children. That's a message you never hear, and should, because it's true. It's also true that abortion is an incredibly inefficient form of birth control. It's resource-intensive, which is why conservatives have been able to attack it by attacking the resources required to perform it. So abortions should be rare in the sense that it should be used when other, more efficient, more available methods of birth control fail, but that's a purely pragmatic argument, not an emotional, ick-factor, trying-to-find-a-middle-ground-with-religious-nuts argument. The emotional argument shouldn't be "Enh, abortion, I guess." It should be "FUCKING YES, ABORTION." We should be working to make abortion less resource intensive. More research on abortifacient medicines. RU-486 is TWENTY THREE YEARS OLD. Twenty three years ago we were using Commodore Amigas, but now, in the age of the iPad, we're still using a 16-bit abortion drug? You know why? Because of the stigma. The stigma is cultural. Cultural stigmas can be reversed. And it needs to be reversed, because otherwise, Roe V Wade will continue to become irrelevant. I'm sure private dodo ownership is legal too, but it doesn't matter how legal it is if you can't actually get one. And when you can't actually get an abortion, women become slaves to their reproductive cycles, second class citizens relegated to womb duty in deference to the all-important fetus. It's a battle we can and should win, but only if we actually fight it.

http%3A//youaredumb.net/



• Opinions are beginning to change on abortion and isn't likely to swing back soon. I, for one, used to be pro-choice. I'm not anymore.

• R1: Is your opinion that attitudes are changing anecdotal or do you have a polling source? The surveys I have read show continued support, and opposition, for that matter, to legalized abortion holding steady, see link. On the 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, one poll showed support for legalized abortion now over 50% for the first time, according to an NBC/Wall Street poll. May I ask why your opinion has changed?

  http://www.pollingreport.com/abortion.htm

• Let's start by making your abortion retroactive.

• The idiots who insist a blastocyst or embryo is the same as a fully-fledged human being are never going to be convinced, because they deliberately shut out all evidence/information that doesn't already fit their world view. They're no different from the troglodytes who think the world is only 6000 years old. Best of luck trying, though.

  PPSM

• There has always been a pro-choice majority in the US. And R1 is trolling.

• This is the saddest thing I've ever read on Datalounge. Who is this Bryan guy think he is? God? He can choose who lives and who dies? I will never, EVER think killing unborn babies is right.

• "Babies" are not aborted R6.

  are%20you%20trolling%3F

• Good news if you're in the knitting needle business!

• The people that talk about 'killing babies' are absolutely ignorant to the facts. Their moral outrage is a dangerous ignorance, manifested into an uninformed opinion, fabricated by men, to control women and allow forced pregnancies and rape. Period If you don't believe in abortion, don't have one.

• I'm uncomfortable with abortion but still pro-choice. I just wish we had free, easy access to effective birth control like Norplant and IUD's which would cut down on the need for abortions. It's galling that for most teenagers seeking abortions they were using no birth control at all.

• I'm unsure if I can support unconditional abortion at will, particularly if the impregnating man hasn't been told.

• I drive past a Planned Parenthood clinic everyday on my commute to work. A few days a week there is a handful of people out there protesting (never mind the fact that in my state, Planned Parenthood does not perform abortions). Its always the same people out there, a collection of old men who probably have not seen a vagina in decades.

• I hate to burst your bubble R11 but most of the men know and don't give a shit or when told the woman is pregnant are never seen again. Abortions are usually embryos that are unwanted and wouldn't have a great life anyway.

• [quote]The idiots who insist a blastocyst or embryo is the same as a fully-fledged human being are never going to be convinced, because they deliberately shut out all evidence/information that doesn't already fit their world view. So please tell us when the blastocyst or embryo becomes a "fully-fledged human being".

• When it is capable of life outside the womb R14. An embryo cannot survive on it's own. It's basically a parasite feeding on it's host at that time. Sounds harsh but it's the truth.

  not%20R4

• [quote]particularly if the impregnating man hasn't been told. If the impregnating man couldn't bother to use birth control, he has no say in it. Hell, even if he did and a pregnancy resulted, it's the woman's decision, not his. Her body, her choice. Period.

  gay%20male

• If it is an unconditional abortion, the mother should have the option of sterilization or going down with the ship.

• If you don't approve of it, don't have one. But leave everyone else alone.

• Whatever, but if you are that ONE man R13 who ISN'T told but wanted it, you'll change your tune.

• R17 you sound like Albert in his Babs Bush drag in the Bird Cage. What is an "unconditional" abortion?

• R16, she could have used the pill or had her tubes tied.

• R20 - not a case of rape/incest/deformities. I'm gonna have an abortion because I can't keep my knees shut, too stupid to use birth control, to self possessed to go to term and raise it or, OR give it up for adoption.

• "Opinions are beginning to change on abortion and isn't likely to swing back soon" It's been going backward - less people support legal abortion - because there Roe v Wade was 40 years ago. No one under 60 has a friend who almost bled to death from an illegal abortion; none of them know someone who got a blood infection from an illegal abortion. They have no idea the panic and fear that women used to go through before abortion was legal.

• Why would a teen have her tubes tied R21 if she could even find a doctor to do that? Many women cannot take the pill because it has side effects? The man is also responsible. If he isn't sure if the girl is on b.c. he should wear a condom. He should anyway for health reasons.

• [quote]Because we're losing on abortion just as surely as we're winning on gay marriage, and we really, really don't want to lose on this one. Big leap, full of assumptions. They're two separate issues. I'm pro-choice but even I can recognize my right to marry has nothing to do with abortion. Gay people have had unprecedented success fighting for their equality and gaining acceptance for the enormously unpopular cause of same sex marriage rights, a fight which for too long we had to manage on our own with few, if any, allies. Call me when it's over and we gays are fully equal, and I'll be glad to consider supporting your cause. But not til then.

• What about married couples R22? Do you think all women who get abortion are single sluts? My own mother had a pregnancy scare after all three of us kids were teens and she would have aborted with Dad's wholehearted support.

• R21, you're a dumbass.

• R24, men shouldn't be fucking "girls."

• Quit quibbling R28. Men, boys, women, girls.

• R23 You're wrong. [quote]Seven in 10 Americans believe Roe v. Wade should stand, according to new data from a Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll...That is the highest level of support for the decision, which established a woman's right to an abortion, since polls began tracking it in 1989.

  http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323301104578255831504582200.html

• Get ready for this name: Jennifer Morbelli. She died last week after a late term abortion at 33 weeks. The fetus was diagnosed with brain abnormalities, and she chose to end the pregnancy, even though at 33 weeks, the fetus has a viable chance of living after birth. It was 6 weeks short of a full-term gestation. Anyhoo, she lived in NY, and had to go to Maryland for the procedure since no doctor in NY would do it. It was a 4 day procedure. The doctor punctured her uterus during the procedure, and she ended up bleeding to death. The irony is that there was a Catholic funeral for her and the baby. Catholics are anti-abortion. I am staunchly pro-choice, but this one sits a little raw with me. I think it would have been more humane for her to have given birth to the baby and then dropped it in a well, or bashed its head in, as they do in China and India. At least Jennifer would still be alive.

• Abortion needs to be banned.

• Why R32? So we can have the scenarios played out here like that poor woman in Ireland who was allowed to suffer and die because she couldn't get an abortion? Does a fetus have more importance than a living, breathing human being? Why do you hate women so much?

• Link for you R32. Not pretty.

  http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/14/world/europe/ireland-abortion-controversy

• Str8 men never make any sense to me. Aren't they always complaining about women "trapping" them with pregnancies? If that's the way they really felt, you'd think they'd be more than happy to wear condoms, get snipped, or give away free abortions on every street corner.

• R22 Most women who have abortions were using birth control only to have it fail. The majority of women who have abortions already have children. I know those facts do not agree with your preconceived and rather narrow notions, but they are facts.

  http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2011/10/most_surprising_abortion_statistic_the_majority_of_women_who_ter.html

• As always, this comes down to an all or nothing argument. One side wants no abortions under any circumstances, and the the other wants abortions under any circumstances. I am fine with abortions in the first trimester. After the first trimester, there should be some restrictions. Abortions in the last trimester should only be in certain cases.

• R35 many of men who oppose abortion are the sorts women are not interested in. A man who wants to control a woman this way is probably not going to be given the chance to breed.

• [quote]the the other wants abortions under any circumstances. That is not true. Forcing a woman to have an abortion against her will is not what those who support choice believe.

• R37 very, very few abortions are done in the last trimester unless the mother's life is in danger or the fetus has a major problem. Some of you seem to think that scads of women are getting abortions in the last trimester. The majority of abortions are done in the first trimester.

• People who are aggressively supportive of abortion are, in my opinion, kind of sick. The killing of unborn babies - that doesn't disturb you? Are you sociopaths? Are you Chinese men who ordered all daughters stoned on the hill?

  Get%20another%20cause%2C%20creepy%20gays

• Repeat R41 no "babies" are aborted. An embryo does not equal baby.

• R41, you sound creepy as well. Get another cause, creepy "straight" (yeah, right) guy.

• People who are "aggressively" supportive of a woman's choice with what to do with her body are concerned that some may view them as nothing more than a vessel and walking incubator with no soul. People who value a fetus over a living, breathing human being are creepy.

• R41 is exactly the kind of ignoramus I talked about in my post - R23.

  R23

• agree with r44. I think abortion is morally wrong, but necessary. Same with euthanizing animals. You can't force a woman to serve as an incubator if she doesn't want to be pregnant. That's why it's deemed pro choice, not pro abortion. No one gleefully goes in to have a fetus sucked out of their vagina.

• I swear that there are fat, old republican men and uneducated, fundie frauen trolling the internet for any mention of their pet cause and they will descend on a board like locusts.

• Gays & lesbians have no obligation to fight for abortion rights. That is the business of straights. Frankly I don't give a fuck.

• Women's rights are very closely linked to gay rights, shitstain at R48.

  PPSM

• If pregnancy is not an option, a man and woman should use multiple forms of birth control to prevent it. The number of abortions would decrease dramatically. r48, I don't fight for it either, but I do vote Democrat across the board.

• [quote]I'm unsure if I can support unconditional abortion at will, particularly if the impregnating man hasn't been told. Ha, ha, ha. Clap, clap, clap. Seriously? Straight men are the biggest fucking hypocrites when it comes to shit like this. I can't tell you how many (from college to work settings) I've heard go on about how they're opposed to it. Put them on the spot and ask about their willingness to provide half of a child's expenses until the age of 18 and the story changes. They'll go, "Oh, yeah. Of course," but they haven't the slightest idea what this means in terms of $$$. Give them a monthly figure in child support (that increases as the kid gets older and has all sorts of needs) and they blanch. We're just talking about money here, not participating in a child's life. They're simply too selfish to think in those terms. In a sense, their opposition to abortion is selfish. It's all about them and their egos. I honestly don't think a lot of them would have been disturbed by the thought that there's a fatherless child of theirs out there in the world. My sense of these men is that if they do indeed get a women pregnant, they hope they're never told. That way there's a possibility that their selfish genes are out there in the world if she decides to have a kid without his knowledge. They can selfishly go on with their lives without another thought or responsibility for their progeny. And if she does get an abortion and doesn't tell him, well, no responsibility for the kid and no moral dilemmas that could disturb their beautiful minds. Anyway freeper men are probably the worst offenders like this lovely fella who wanted it all (wife, mistress, other mistress), including a congressional seat, but just not the fetus.

  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/10/scott-desjarlais-abortion-pro-life_n_1953136.html

• Everyone on this thread is angry and mentally unstable.

• The people that talk about 'killing babies' are absolutely ignorant to the facts. Their moral outrage is a dangerous ignorance, manifested into an uninformed opinion, fabricated by men, to control women and allow forced pregnancies and rape. Period If you don't believe in abortion, don't have one.

  worth%20repeating

• r48 has it. Until gay people are equal under the law, why should we care? It's like asking a black person living in the Jim Crow South to get all worked up about the plight of the endangered snowy owl in the Pacific Northwest. Mainstream straight culture does everything it can to tell me I'm unequal, that my opinion and perspective don't matter. And then they come knocking on the door, expecting me to get all worked up about their issues? Thanks, but no thanks.

• No, only you r52/r41.

• So much ignorance on this thread -- on both sides of this issue. And regarding r34, the Catholic Church has the Rule of Double Effect which allows for actions that will save the life of the mother even if a foreseeable effect is negative. No Catholic institution that understands its own catechism would have allowed that woman to die. Of course, most Catholics (like most people) are just so uninformed.

• I'm pro-choice, but...we have babies surviving at 20 weeks now. When is that foetuz/baby line is crossed. Will always be pro-choice, but it still makes me sad.

• Good lord, my typos. It's 5am here...

  as%20if%20that%20excuses%20it

• [quote]And regarding [R34], the Catholic Church has the Rule of Double Effect which allows for actions that will save the life of the mother even if a foreseeable effect is negative. No Catholic institution that understands its own catechism would have allowed that woman to die The doctors in Ireland failed their Hippocratic Oath and were more concerned about saving their own hides vis a vis Irish law. I really hope they lose their licenses to practice. The case of the 9 year old girl in Brazil is another example of the church's failure to observe its own teachings. She'd been raped by her stepfather and was pregnant with twins. She could not have carried them to term or delivered without risking her life. Her mother and the doctor were excommunicated by the bishop who thought that risking the child's life in the hopes of delivering was in accordance with canon.

• Religion, the speed bumps on the road of humane progression.

• Here's my question: If the operative principle is "her body, her choice", why aren't more straight people talking about how infant circumcision violates the principle of "his body, his choice"? The boy who has the body should have the choice when he is old enough.

• This thread is about abortion, not circumcision. Would you like me to start a new thread for you, R61?

• [quote]"Babies" are not aborted [R6]. Well, that's not true. Call everything what it is, now. I think people who want late-term abortions are sick, but it's sicker to literally rely on abortions, in the case where the body is fully formed and the heart is beating, as a fallback. And it's expensive. But I agree with most of what this guy says. I agree with researching abortion medications for rapid termination after unprotected sex, which can be effective for a longer period of time than the "morning after" pill. No one in our culture is going to develop sexual integrity all of a sudden. By "sexual integrity" I'm not suggesting that sex is wrong in any way, but this is a society where we end up paying for each other. Since I don't want to pay for anyone's unwanted children OR their stupid, repetitive sex decisions, I would love for there to be a very accessible and cheap spontaneous abortion pill that works up to a certain point. The only thing that we'd see more of are fetuses in public restrooms, in the trash, and on the side of the road. Small price to pay, though. We're a country of wimps and we should get used to seeing stuff like that.

• Yes, please R62. Thanks in advance.

• R63 you are welcome to your opinion but I do not equate a first trimester fetus with a fully formed "baby". As pointed out earlier, late term abortions are rare and only done when the mother's life is in danger or the fetus is so damaged that it won't have any quality of life.

• How should I phrase the subject line, R64?

  R62

• When the bones don't yet crunch when you bite into it, it's still a fetus, generally less than 22 weeks.

• R62 - If it's "her body her choice," why not "his body his choice" re circumcision? and then your narrative can just be "Discuss." Much obliged.

• Sure, R65, but every time I hear abortion activists profess, it's seems as though they want UNLIMITED right to terminate, including up to the very end. Of course, everyone has a right to do or try what they want. But no one else should have to pay for that. Seriously.

• The title of this thread makes me laugh. Come on girls, we're doing abortions in Judy's office from 3 - 4, after birthday cake.

• I hope so. We need to focus on abortion. There are some red states that are cray out there.

• R69 who is asking you to pay for their abortion?

• R72, Activists certainly don't expect women and men themselves to foot the bill. And if they think they're going to get their private insurance companies/employers to pay for it any time soon, they're a bit overzealous.

• R69 abortions are paid for in cash by the person getting the abortion. This is one of those little facts that anti-abortionists ignore and they always bring out the "no one else should have to pay for it" b.s. A D&C maybe be partly paid for by insurance and those are pretty routine for women suffering miscarriages and they have a co-pay.

• R74, I'm not talking about what's currently done.

• An in-home kit would really alleviate the controversy. Where is James Dyson with the Cyclonic Load-Lightener™?

• Then what are you talking about R75?

• r59, again, "excommunication" would not be in line with the teachings of the Catholic Church and the case of the 9 (or 13) year old (whatever her age, it was rape) who gave birth. The Rule of Double Effect would have taken precedence when/if a woman's life is in danger.

  r56

• The author is absolutely right - and I'll admit, I've kind of been rolling my eyes at all the talk coming from BOTH sides about abortion for the last few years, mostly because I'm fairly certain that Republicans on the national platform have no real intention of overturning Roe v. Wade, as much as they squawk about it. They NEED to be able to squawk about it in order to keep securing votes from a large contingent of single-issue voters. I hadn't thought a lot about all of the increasingly strict state regulations that have been passed though - I had no idea there was only ONE place in all of Mississippi to get a legal abortion, for instance. I live in a town of 70,000 that's the largest town around for hours in a very rural state, and I know of at least two clinics within easy driving distance of my house that perform abortions. I drive past one of them of them almost every day, and lately it seems like there's always one or two assholes outside picketing with these cringe worthy "Please pray to end abortion" signs (always the same assholes standing there for HOURS, of course - nothing to do folks?), but still, I highly doubt the place is closing down anytime soon. Still, I think the author is spot on that these piddly regulations here and there need to be a topic of national concern for those of us who are fortunate enough to live in more evolved areas. Oh yeah, and also: [quote]And when you can't actually get an abortion, women become slaves to their reproductive cycles, second class citizens relegated to womb duty in deference to the all-important fetus. "Pro-lifers" should be forced to read this one sentence over and over again until it fucking sticks. Jesus fucking Christ.

• R77, By process of elimination: what is generally desired.

• Let's not forget also those type who picket also kick said baby to the curb once they're born. For some reason they fixate on the fetus and ignore the kids living in poverty.

• [quote]And when you can't actually get an abortion, women become slaves to their reproductive cycles, second class citizens relegated to womb duty in deference to the all-important fetus.

  The%20Truth

• R73 I guess it has to be asked again, when has someone asked you to pay for their abortion? You made that statement, so why is it so hard for you to answer? And when have pro choice advocates said they don't expect women and men themselves to foot the bill?

• Women need to use birth control or keep their legs closed. I'm tired of sluts murdering babies because they can't pop a pill, put a condom on the dude, or just don't care. There's a difference between rape/incest, and the majority of sluts that just had an "oopsy"

• R80 is quite a bizarre little troll. No one is asking anyone to pay for abortions. We'd just like it kept legal.

• Who wants to take dumbass r84 on?

• Think about how many of us were probably unplanned or unwanted?. Are you glad you got this life or would you have been just as content to have your only extra-uterine experience being sucked down a vacuum hose? Speaking for myself, I'm glad I got this life and I wouldn't want to deny anyone else the chance. Many potential parents out there are clamoring to adopt a baby.

• From R84 earlier: "Gays & lesbians have no obligation to fight for abortion rights. That is the business of straights. Frankly I don't give a fuck." He's craving attention.

• R87 that is a ridiculous argument. If you had never been born you wouldn't know it and as far as your in utero experience do you remember it? I think not and a fetus is not self-aware or even sentient at that time.

• so r88? If sluts used birth control, abortion wouldn't even be an issue..except in the case of incest/rape, which 98% of people agree abortions should be allowed

• It's funny that so many of you scream, march, blog, protest, fight, and give money to gain equal rights, and yet, you don't give a flip about the rights of unborn babies.

• You are forgetting those older married couples who may have an "oops" moment due to bc failure. A lot of married women get abortions too.

• R84 Most women who get abortions used birth control only to have it fail.

• R89. I was asking your preference not theirs. Not course they don't fucking know. You won debate club right? I was always pro choice. Now that I have seen a few abortions (it isn't always a wee raisin that comes out) I have a hard time denying that entity a right to live. Question - Do you support euthanasia for animals in shelters?

• R91 unfortunately the "rights" of a fetus do not trump the rights of a living woman much as you'd like to reduce them to walking incubators.

• R83/85, How is it bizarre to expect that the ideals of abortion activism include making the procedures paid for? Or what if they want many more actual clinics to be built? It seems many do. The money for that had better come from private benefactors. It IS, as the author said, "resource intensive." For me, this article didn't lean toward "keeping it legal" so much as what should be done to advance the cause. I have my ideas about what should be done, but there are always residual problems caused by advancements. People on here just want to pick out the stuff they don't like in others' opinions and cause straight-up drama. Trust me, even those us who seem to agree on every point will eventually find a point of contention about issues like these.

• R92. Why not give up for adoption?

• Here's the problem with that philosophy, r87, it's not realistic. Making abortion illegal doesn't achieve your utopian ideals. Women will still have them, women will die from botched jobs, there will be no counseling, no discussion on alternatives or birth-control. You see, this is merely a wedge to dismantle women's rights. So, it's great you feel women shouldn't desire abortions, and it's great if there wasn't any. However, without safe, legal abortions there is actually more at loss than an undeveloped fetus. R91, You're logic is skewed, read above.

• There's no way of proving that, R93, but there should be better birth control, in addition to more effective abortion pills. There is no doubt some less useful medication research going on.

• See, I told you. R84/90 is craving attention. F&F

• R94 like abortion euthanizing animals is an ugly business but at this point necessary because there are simply too many idiots not getting their animals neutered. I don't like it but until people start caring for animals and careless breeders are shut down it's necessary. What else should we do with the animals no one wants?

• R99 what do you mean it can't be proven? My third brother was proof that bc fails. Birth control is only effective 99.9% of the time which is good but still allows for failure.

• Why am I not surprised that in that mess of a word salad R96 wrote, no where can be found the answer to the questions they were asked?

• R98. I never said it was utopia, I do question if we should make non conditional abortions legal. In my opinion, I have trouble seeing the difference in a fetus with a heartbeat being different than a new born left in a dumpster (murder). R101. I agree, but I truly hate to punish the only innocent things on this earth (animals and babies) because of irresponsible fuckwits.

• R99 Read it and weep: [quote]The Guttmacher report shows “54 percent of women who have abortions had used a contraceptive method *usually condom or the pill...

  http://www.lifenews.com/2011/01/11/report-shows-contraception-failure-54-used-before-abortion/

• Ok, R103. You asked me when someone has asked me to pay for her abortion. She hasn't. I predict it would come to that if all ideals were realized. And no, obviously no one will be personally summoned to pay for an abortion in the manner that one is summoned for jury duty, if you were asking literally.

• [quote]How is it bizarre to expect that the ideals of abortion activism include making the procedures paid for? Again, you don't pay for them. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

• BTW if they ever discover a way to test for "gay" in a pregnant woman, you'll be regretting your abortion support. Straight women won't give a fuck, especially hypocritical liberal women: they'll abort that kid with no second thought

• That's what they SAY to save face, r105.

• Not necessarily R108. Just as some woman know their child will be severely handicapped and have it anyway when they could choose to abort. I wouldn't worry about it though.

• [quote]I'm unsure if I can support unconditional abortion at will, particularly if the impregnating man hasn't been told. I'm so sick of this argument. When science makes it possible for an unwanted embryo to be implanted in the responsible male if he wants to demand that the pregnancy be brought to completion against the woman's will, then we'll talk (although you just KNOW that suddenly every "pro-life" man in the country would change his tune if that were really possible). I know this is only anecdotal evidence, but I know of at least one case where a young woman made the unfortunate mistake of being knocked up by a major asshole with rage issues (she's a family member of my partner's). She knew there was no way she could afford a child, so she had an abortion. Somehow, the asshole found out about it and maturely responded by breaking into her house at night and beating her with a baseball bat while yelling "This is for killing my baby." He's a jobless prick who still sponges off of his parents and I'm sure he would have done NOTHING to support an actual child, but he had the fucking gall to refer to an expelled embryo as "MY baby." I'm sure that anyone with half a brain could see that deep down, he clearly didn't give two shits about anyone's "baby" and was merely enraged that this lowly female had the fucking nerve to refuse to carry, give birth to, and forever be tied down to the result of him blowing his load into her one drunken night.

• And you have proof of this R109?

• R108 Is your argument really based on some hypothetical situation that will a) probably never happen or b) if it does happen it will occur long after we are all dead? Really? That's the route you're taking?

• R109 please provide your proof to back up your claim.

• R108's argument is straight out of the anti-abortion handbook. I've seen freepers using that argument on other blogs.

• [quote]It's funny that so many of you scream, march, blog, protest, fight, and give money to gain equal rights, and yet, you don't give a flip about the rights of unborn babies. I give a huge flip about the rights of women to decide what to do with their bodies.

• Yeah R11? The whole point of abortion is that it is a woman's right to choose what she does with her own body. Thinking that it's a man's right to decide that as an entitled owner sort of defeats that. So you're saying it's all right for men to choose what a woman does with her body?

• It's true though, r105.

• Oh, I don't know, R97 - Maybe because carrying a pregnancy to term and going through childbirth are extremely fucking invasive, life altering things, and maybe, just maybe, a woman should have the choice to not have to subject herself to that if she doesn't want to? And let's not forget that an older woman like in the proposed example you were responding to happens to be much more at risk for potential complications. Miscarriages occur at a rate of about 1 in every 4 pregnancies, and that rate is even higher in older women. A miscarriage is an extremely painful experience that requires immediate medical attention as soon as it occurs, and the end result is the same as an abortion, but I guess you'd rather subject a practically menopausal woman to that than to allow her to merely choose to get an abortion at her own comfort and convenience. I'm fucking sick of these clueless "Why not adoption?" dolts acting like a pregnancy is NOTHING. And even if you do believe that human rights begin at conception - Name one other instance in which a human has the right to parasitically live off of another human's body in order to remain alive, fully against the will of the other person. NO ONE has that particular right.

• r114, it doesn't take "proof", just common sense that most women aren't going to be truthful about whether they used birth control when seeking an abortion.

• Anyone who can't discuss reproductive issues without calling women "sluts" is not to be taken seriously. Some of you sound like a GOP state rep from the Deep South.

• R120 What is it about you? You make these insane statements and then when asked to provide proof to back it up, you refuse to do so? Do you really think no one here doesn't see through what you're doing?

• You posters whining about adoption must be white, with no black friends/associates. Have you any idea how hard it is to adopt out perfectly healthy, beautiful black infants and toddlers? Too many white and Asian couples would rather adopt trananstionally than adopt a black child in their own county. It's one of the many reasons gay and single-parent adoption rights are so important. Those two groups in general have less blinkered bigotry in terms of cross-racial and special-needs adoptions. They do the work of the angels.

• R123 I know three gay couples who have adopted children. All of them are white. They all adopted black children.

• It doesn't require proof r122, besides the BURDEN is on YOU who is making the claim, not me.

• [quote]Straight women won't give a fuck, especially hypocritical liberal women Oh, shut up, troll. My sister (straight and liberal) is thrilled to have a possibly gay son. Not everyone is a homophobe like you.

• R125 I provided the proof. You are the one who is saying the proof is not accurate so it's up to you to provide that evidence. You refuse to do so. We can draw only one conclusion. You have no proof. Everyone here sees what you are. You are fooling no one.

• Developing better methods of birth control really needs to be at the forefront of this discussion too. Morons like R84 who says things like "I don't understand why these sluts can't just pop a pill" obviously have no fucking understanding of the side effects involved with using any form of hormonal birth control, and the fact that a LOT of women can't use it for those reasons. As for condoms, let's be real - Nobody really likes using them, and just like gay men, straight people sometimes fuck up and skip them while in the heat of the moment. (I'm not trying to say that the condom isn't a wonderful invention that's done a LOT of good, but I don't think it would kill anyone to be a little bit more honest about the sacrifice in personal pleasure for both parties that occurs when they're used, and the realistic effect that this has on their usage.) IUDs are a promising thing, but from what I understand they're almost prohibitively expensive for a lot of women. We have a long way to go before birth control is truly affordable and easy enough for all women that "Why don't sluts just use birth control?" becomes the slightest bit reasonable as an argument.

• R121 - Agree. If we can also question some of the ethics of abortion without being accused of treating women like carpet, etc. The second name calling starts, intelligent discussion has stopped. Let's step it up guys and gals.

• No, there is no way to prove whether abortions occur because of failed protection. I'm sorry. I hate when people try to use "stats" about these things. They don't help. R128, agreed, in addition to a cheap and effective abortion pill. P.S., R103, talk about word salad.

• R124, did you not read my entire post? You were looking to be insulted. Please go back and read my last paragraph.

  R123

• R117, if they are in a committed relationship, yes, the impregnating man should have input beyond 'sperm donation'. That doesn't mean I am not pro-choice. But let me ask you: if a man and a woman are in a committed relationship and the woman becomes pregnant with his child, is it okay for her to have an abortion without letting him know she's pregnant, or letting him know she is going to have an abortion?

• Most committed relationships have open communication and most of the men I'm sure are told. It would be hard to hide an abortion because you can't have sex for about 6 weeks. I'd like to know what kind of stories women could make up to explain that away.

• For the sake of consistency, I'd say no, R132. Men, married or committed or not, should not have legal rights to the decision. It doesn't take two people to make a decision. That should be a personal understanding between the husband and wife, subject to no legal ramifications either way.

• R125 demonstrates the typical way regressives operate. Say to them, "here is the evidence the earth's climate is changing" or "here is the evidence Iraq had no WMD program" or "here is the evidence that supports evolution" and their answer is always the same. "It's a lie!" Ask them for evidence to back up their claim and they brush it off and say they don't need proof. Their gut tells them everything they need to know. Facts and evidence are meaningless.

• Anecdotally, most women I know who've had abortions were on the pill, but if it works 99% of the time, that's still several opportunities a year for the pill to fail. Which it does. A lot.

• r135 gets it.

• lo

• R135: Here is one way to respond to these people: "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You have not even provided ordinary evidence. Those who do not know the evidence on a subject should be ignored." Fox News has mastered this tactic.

• "...Preserve the dignity and sanctity and respect of human life." - Reasoning given behind an amendment to the Minnesota bill establishing Minnesota's Obamacare insurance exchange. The amendment? Banning any of the private insurance purchased by private individuals using their private money through the public exchanges from covering abortion, unless that abortion threatened the health of the mother, or was the result of incest or rape reported to police within 48 hours of the event. The bill's sponsor? Faribault Patti Fritz (Democrat). The vote on the amendment in the Minnesota House, recently turned over to Democrats in the 2012 elections? 71-58 in favor. This is some bullshit. The sanctity of human life is not at issue here. Nor is the dignity. And certainly not fucking respect. The exchanges are what poor people got stuck with after Obama negotiated away the public option. The exchanges "allow" poor people who can't afford health insurance to shop for cheaper plans from insurance companies that they might be able to afford, since Obamacare's going to require you to afford one anyway. So, in order to preserve the dignity of human life, Patti Fritz wants to make sure poor people's abortions aren't covered by private insurance, in the hopes that they won't be able to afford abortions out of their own money, so they can be forced to have a baby they can't afford either, just because the government's gonna make an Expedia-style webpage and be sort of involved. I expect this kind of embryo-fetishizing, poor-kicking crap from Republicans. That's their brand. But what's the point of handing the state government over to Democrats for the first time in decades if the Democrats we turn it over to are going to pull shit like this? Poor people should be able to have abortions. Rape victims should be able to have their insurance pay for abortions even if they wait THREE WHOLE DAYS to tell police about it. If you're not on board with that, don't let the big tent's flap hit you in the ass on the way out, thanks. -- Bryan Lambert

  http://youaredumb.net/

• Marriage equality is a just and good fight. Abortion is an evil practice akin to infanticide that all good people should oppose. The two issues are distinct.

• Grow up.

• How odd is it the same people who want a smaller, less intrusive government want the government to keep track of what a woman does with her vagina, her eggs, and her embryo.

• Marriage equality AND reproductive choice are both just and good fights, r141, whether you find one of them personally repugnant or not. Both are branches of the same tree, the right to privacy and to non-interference of the state in the private lives of the people.

• Proudly pro life.

  Life is Sacred.

• I've had more children pulled out of me than a burning orphanage!

  Evie%20Harris

• Pro-life & Pro-choice here. This has been done and it really should be over. Why the wing-nuts cling to this abortion thing is beyond me. Advocate abstinence, birth control, and/or RESPONSIBILITY. Messing around with this is a time bomb and a slippery slope.

• Good for you, R145. Your beliefs are your beliefs. Don't put your belief in what is right for you onto other people. There are plenty of people who think the state should execute homosexuals because they think that is in their holy books. Some people deny evolution and while that's OK to believe, we don't let their religious beliefs decide what gets taught in public schools. Different religions have different attitudes about abortion, some lenient, some strict. Some religions deny evolution. We don't write either of those beliefs into our statutes. Some religions believe that adults can let their children die because they think modern health technology is prohibited in their book. We don't allow them to write our laws. The same people who oppose abortion rights want the state to protect embryos and to enforce capital punishment. They want to force women to have children but want to deny the children any state aid from food to schools. They love life when it isn't here yet and scorn it when it arrives. Any law is a compromise. Every law has consequences beyond its intent. Abortion laws are on the books for many reasons, but one reason is that unintended pregnancies throw many mothers and children onto hard economic times. If people who oppose abortion rights would also support socialized medicine, free and easy access to contraception, free daycare, full employment starting with heads of families, at least they would be arguing morally consistent positions. Keep your hands off our bodies.

• R145 here. Human life is sacred, please don't rationalize murder. For the record, I am also pro marriage equality and like another poster pointed out, they are 2 distinct different issues. That story about that woman dying from aborting her full term baby was chilling. Of course that cowardly doctor just ran away after killing her. He should be on trial for murder.

• R145 and R149: Do you support Head Start, free daycare, free school lunches, free and easily available birth control? Do you support an increase in the SNAP program including a lowering of income eligibility and an increase in the allotment so no child will go hungry and no child's family will either? Do you support active state intervention into homes where children are at risk? Do you support full financial support for mothers who have children instead of an abortion until they can find decent, secure jobs? If you don't support these things, and most opponents of abortion rights do not, how do you distinguish the right of the fetus to be unharmed from the right of a child to grow up to be all he can be? So he is less likely to have children who might be aborted? Should legal protection of human welfare stop after a live birth? If so why? Are you against the death penalty? If you are not, isn't it a rationalization of murder?

• I am on board with all the programs to aid the lower incomed people. The death penalty, well, that is tricky because some innocent people are executed. For the Oklahoma bomber and other unrepentant terrorists, I don't have a problem with it. They are not innocent babies growing in their mother's womb, they are the scum of the earth, it is not the same thing.

  Voice of reason.