Being “okay with abortion but only when the pregnant person’s life is in danger” is a nonsensical belief.
There’s no such thing as a pregnancy that’s 100% safe. So what’s the threshold for chance of death that should be required for an abortion? 10%? 50%? 99%? And who gets to decide that?
1) Supreme Court draft opinions do not leak. Ever. It is unknown and unprecedented. It just does not happen.
2) Supreme Court clerks are generally right-out-of-law-school graduates and if whoever did this gets caught they will never be allowed to practice law. No state bar is ever going to take them. Their legal career is done for. This person risked their entire future.
I hope the court can’t prove anything. May we never know their name.
the supreme court decision to overturn Roe v. Wade is not official yet. someone leaked a draft of the opinion that the members of the court have been circulating and revising (the draft was created by justice samuel alito).
which is insane by the way. it’s the first time that a draft of a supreme court decision has ever been leaked in the entire history of this country.
it makes perfect sense to feel grief or panic or dread or sadness or anger or whatever you’re feeling right now. this is fucking terrible and scary. just for the sake of avoiding misinformation, i wanted to clarify this because i think a lot of the headlines have been misleading, and the info gets even more misconstrued when it’s rephrased on social media and stuff
I’ve noticed that when I remind people that “women’s issues” affect men too- periods, pregnancy, abortion, higher sexual assault, etc- they react very dismissive. Like, “oh yeah, trans men too, i guess.” And it’s because they don’t view trans men’s issues as men’s issues, they view them as a subsect of women’s issues. People, including many, many allies, just straight up do not conceive of trans men as men. They certainly may believe us when we say we identify as men, but in their minds we are always just a different flavor of woman- and I know this because I have gotten this point of view in my own head, where I have to remind myself that my issues are, in fact, men’s issues. Not women’s. Not “non-men’s.” Abortion is a men’s issue. “Pink taxes” are a men’s issue. These are things that affect men.
Ask some people that question, and they will probably say something simple like “It’s a procedure used by doctors to terminate a pregnancy.”
Ask someone else the same question and they may scream back something like, “It’s the murder of an unborn child.”
Others heatedly deny it’s murder, because it’s “the woman’s body” and she has the right to terminate the unwanted “fetus”.
Besides that, it’s legal, ruled so by the U. S. Supreme Court itself.
End of story, right? Well…maybe.
Let’s see what Webster has to say. “1. Induced termination of pregnancy before the fetus is capable of survival as an individual. 2. Any fatally premature expulsion of an embryo or fetus from the womb.”
So, it seems even Webster dodged the point, except to call the life within the woman a “fetus” or “embryo.” No mention of “human life.” Although, Webster does use the term “fatally.”
In my opinion, “fatally” refers to the death of someone or something. Or to kill someone or something.
Others may view it differently
Which brings on the question: Are you pro or anti-abortion?
As for me, I have to go with the antis. The life in a pregnant woman’s body is indeed “human.” How can you say otherwise? Life is life.
And as for the old adage that “It’s the woman’s body and her right?” No. No. No. There are two bodies involved – the potential mother and the baby she carries. Or fetus if you prefer.
The great Supremes can rule it lawful until the cows come home, but a life still has been taken and violently, or “fatally,” as Webster would have it.
However, there are several exceptions to my stand on the subject. I believe in cases involving sexual assault – rape – or incest, and where the mother’s life is in possible danger, the woman has the right to to get an abortion if she so desires. Forced to have a child in such circumstances could have dire consequences in her future.
Otherwise, the Pros can jump up and down and do back flips to the moon and back. But, when it all settles back down, a death or deaths do occur.
A pregnant woman is not unlike one of our apace ships. The lives of the crew on a spacecraft depend solely on their ship.
Food, shelter, clothing, air, water. The whole nine yards.
The same applies to the mother to be.
She is the spaceship for that life growing within her body. It depends totally on her natural bodily functions for its food, shelter, air, etc.
Abortion “violently” interrupts that process, killing the life inside her. That is the gospel. You can take it to the bank. No court ruling, No “It’s her body” claim can be justified.
I am not advocating overturning Roe vs Wade. I am just insisting that abortion be labeled for what it really is: The violent taking of a human life.
Stop playing games, Pros. If you want to kill your babies, then go right ahead. But do it with the full understanding of what you are truly doing,
That’s all.
I’ve seen anti-choicers compare pregnant people to all sorts of inanimate things, from houses to boats to life-support machines.
Some moral dilemmas are interesting. I saw a post comparing abortion to a blood transfusion. The example goes as follows:
Person A is in need of a super rare blood type and will die if they don’t get it.
Person B is the only person with that blood type who is available within the limited time frame.
It is up to Person B as to whether they give some of their blood to Person A, as both have bodily autonomy. Person B does not have to give blood.
I find this interesting. While on one hand, I do not believe Person B should be forced to give their own blood, I do think it would be immoral for them to not do so. Evil even.
I feel this situation fails to argue for abortion, but a major reason it fails is I am not sure how to handle the situation. Not to mention, in deploying this situation they are acknowledging that the fetus is a human being.
I dare say, I probably am in favor of some kind of negative action being taken against Person B if they let Person A die. I am unsure what that punishment should be, but I think I do support one.
You can’t force someone to donate blood. There is no ethical way to punish them for not donating blood even if you think it’s immoral. There could be MANY reasons why they choose not to give blood. You might think it’s immoral for them to not give blood, but so is forcing them to.
And just because you think something is immoral doesn’t mean it should be illegal.
And here we see more evidence that the anti choice crowd actually doesn’t understand what the word choicemeans.
Funny though, considering that the pro life attitude in these same situations is usually “you shouldn’t have had sex then”.
Except for foster kids. Who y'all like to trot out on parade to “prove” how abortion isn’t necessary. While ignoring actual fostered teens/adults who are telling you to stop because fostering/adoption has massive issues inherent in the system.
Almost like none of you actually know what you’re talking about. But we knew that already.
Daily reminder, life is a continuous process that began at least 3.5 billion years ago and anyone who says otherwise is preaching religious doctrine and not objective facts.
You don’t have to be religious to be pro life or to not acknowledge science. I personally think from liking science that living things were around far beyond 3.5 million years ago when we consider the study of dinosaurs and sea creatures. A single creature or human is created when our own life begins at conception. (I am speaking of when the sperm and egg join as one, for clarification).
I said 3.5 billion, not million. Important distinction. I realize that not everyone who is against abortion is catholic but they’re still following catholic doctrine whether they like it or not. Also, why start at conception? Isn’t sperm already a living thing? Why not say life begins at ejaculation? Oh right, because this is actually about controlling women’s bodies.
the “I believe in abortion only in extreme situations” people (especially women) truly baffle me because I genuinely consider “a human has another human growing inside of them and does not want to” to be a very extreme situation. to me that feels so deeply like an extreme emergency situation. I know this has been said before but it’s incredible to me that this does not feel innately horrifying and “extreme” to everyone.
any pregnancy has the inherent risk of killing you and is guaranteed to alter your body forever, ergo nobody should have to do it without consenting to it
#Repost @probikersforlife ・・・ FEAST OF THE HOLY INNOCENTS ❤️ Dec 28th HOLY MASS, CHURCH OF THE HOLY INNOCENTS NYC Bishop Peter Byrne Celebrant
TODAY we honor the HOLY INNOCENTS, the young boys who were killed by king Herod. Hearing of the birth of the Infant Jesus, Herod issued a decree massacring these children in a vain attempt to destroy the Savior, whom he feared might grow to be a rival king. Today, we honor these tiny martyrs and pray with them for all the children in the world.
#Repost @jeffreybruno ・・・ Faithful. Courage. - Fr, Fidelis CFR steps between the police and protesters as he leads a group in prayer for all of those effected by the Roe V. Wade decision in Soho, NYC. @cfr_franciscans
Even if you disagree with them, and even if their attitude about it is flippant, it is something they can never take back. They are mothers that no longer have a child, and that is a loss I can’t even imagine.
You’re in NO way pro-life. People against abortion are only anti-choice. Taking away a women’s right to choose what to do with HER body.
To bad it’s not just her body. Woman can choose whatever they want when it does not affect another human being. What about the babies choice? Does she not have a say? She didn’t choose to be conceived.
