Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
My mother had 3 miscarriages in the 3rd trimester, where she went into labor and gave birth before viability. This is decades ago, and before I was ever a thought. Back then they didn't have sonograms and did not have the neonatal technology to save a preemie as they do today.
She had to have D&C at least once, possibly more. Finally the issue was discovered from a D&C -- a bicornuate uterus. She eventually had surgery to repair the issue, and was able to carry a baby to term (me).
In some misbegotten backarse states with legislatures who don't even understand how a woman's body works, and their interest in draconian laws, someone having a 2nd or 3rd trimester miscarriage could possibly be accused and charged with a crime.
Someone having an ectopic pregnancy will be forced to die if some of these crappy states have their way!
But don't they have up to 15 weeks to abort or take the morning after pill?
The first month of missing her period and taking the home pregnancy test makes it easy to know well in advance if she is pregnant.
In Mississippi yes. Not in Kentucky as of today. Today. We went backwards 50 years. I’m personally pro life. I also believe in progress and body autonomy, so politically I’m pro choice. It’s been the law of the land my entire life. This does not bode well when the SC is taking away rights. Fascism is here.
What a ridiculous statement. Both of my children know that I am pro-choice. I know that my biological mother is pro-choice. Many mothers are pro-choice. Where are the scars?
There is no such thing as being "pro-choice". You are either pro-abortion or pro-life. There is no middle ground. Saying you are "pro-choice" is an attempt to shield yourself from the reality that you support another woman's right to kill her child.
If we were talking about an adult woman wanting to kill an adult man, you would be against that, unless it was an innocent life in the womb... It is hypocritical...
Giving power back to the people - of course the left is upset about that.
By "the people", you must mean third parties interjecting their opinions into the lives of strangers. The involved parties already had the power to decide.
that's ridiculous where I am against abortion after a certain point I think all contraception should be on the table. plan b is contraception. i consider myself a libertarian.
No, the decision specifically said they should reconsider Griswald (birth control)
But don't they have up to 15 weeks to abort or take the morning after pill?
The first month of missing her period and taking the home pregnancy test makes it easy to know well in advance if she is pregnant.
Texas now allows only 6 weeks, which is before many women even know they are pregnant. Many women have irregular cycles and so don't really know if a period was missed until the next month.
Now, every state can make their own restrictions on when and if abortion is allowed. Some consider the morning after pill or Plan B to be an abortion. Some consider certain types of birth control to be abortion.
There is no such thing as being "pro-choice". You are either pro-abortion or pro-life. There is no middle ground. Saying you are "pro-choice" is an attempt to shield yourself from the reality that you support another woman's right to kill her child.
If we were talking about an adult woman wanting to kill an adult man, you would be against that, unless it was an innocent life in the womb... It is hypocritical...
I disagree. I consider myself pro-choice, which means that I support women deciding for themselves whether or not to see a pregnancy to term. I do not promote abortion. I promote guaranteed access to abortion should a woman choose to pursue it.
Abstinence has always been recommended as the only certain way to avoid conception. The pragmatic response to this SCOTUS decision is for all fertile women to practice abstinence unless they are planning to conceive if they are unable to travel for an abortion. If the only women choosing to have sexual intercourse would be infertile due to natural causes, hysterectomy, or menopause, the result would be that the only unwanted pregnancies would be due to rape or incest, which would be easier to prosecute with the baby's DNA. It would be interesting to see how many pregnancies occur when the mother is below the age of consent.
Of course, the human sex drive is notorious for overwhelming rational thought, so it is unlikely that anything resembling a national sex boycott is unlikely to happen, even though that is what seems to be called for. In any case, abstinence remains the logical choice for a woman who does not want to become pregnant. I don't know if all the husbands and boyfriend's would agree, but it's not their (the man's)body.
You could have just posted that. It's not the governor's, Amy Comey Barrett's, the boyfriend's, a rapist's, a group of evangelical Christians, or strangers' on the internet's body. It belongs to the woman herself. As for this suppsed need to justify to (mostly male) politicians or doctors that it's only OK for her to have an abortion in the case of "rape or incest" (which are both rape,) that's garbage also. A woman isn't ready to be a biological mother? She shouldn't forced to be one against her will. Period, end of story.
My children are aware that I had an abortion before they were born, and they know why. My pregnancy was diagnosed with a severe congenital defect, which their father and I decided together to terminate after seeking opinions from experts in perinatology and pediatric neurology. It is important for our children to understand our family's health history as they face decisions about whether or not to pursue pregnancy or adoption should they wish to become parents. Get it now?
I have heard many stories of women being told their child would be born defective, only for them to give birth to a perfectly healthy baby... I am not saying that would have happened in your case, however, I would have had the child and let the chips fall where they may. That way, at least you would have done everything you could have for the sake of the child.
The is forcing rape and incest? As far as I know rape and incest is illegal in Kentucky. The state is forcing women to not kill the baby growing inside them. The state is not forcing women to become pregnant. The state is not forcing pregnancy. The only way to force pregnancy on someone (force someone to become pregnant) is to rape them. The state says that is illegal. Glad we could get this worked out!
Because it is illegal it doesn’t happen?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
