Pages

Wednesday, November 12, 2014

When Democracy Wins, Abortion Loses

Despite the very common misconception that the US is mostly pro-choice, the US is in fact majority pro-life (48% pro-life, 45% pro-choice). And probably most shocking to your average American: the youngest generation (you know, the one that just started voting) is most likely to say abortion should be illegal in all circumstances. Young people don't just call themselves "pro-life," a phrase which can have an array of meanings; they explicitly support making abortion illegal.  

Click to enlarge

So it should come as no surprise that the nation leaned more pro-life on November 4th. Most notably, the people of Tennessee removed the right to an abortion from the state's constitution, finally allowing a democratic approach to abortion legality.

Now Tennessee has three proposals up to bat:
  1. Mandatory waiting period for women seeking abortion
  2. Mandatory counseling (informed consent)
  3. Inspection requirements for abortion facilities
According to Gallup:
  • 60% of pro-choicers and 79% of pro-lifers support waiting periods
  • 86% of pro-choicers and 87% of pro-lifers support informed consent
If Tennessee is anything like the overall nation, these proposals will pass. The fact that TN needed a constitutional "right to abortion" to prevent restrictions from passing may remind you of a similar, yet larger-scale case of short-circuiting democracy: Roe v. Wade. For the past 40 years, the ruling of 7 justices has allowed the killing of preborn human beings at any stage of development based on privacy (oddly, though, women cannot murder their toddlers using the same rationale). And this overreach has not jived with the vast majority of Americans. For example, 79% of pro-choicers and 94% of pro-lifers want third-trimester abortions banned.

Americans have skewed views of how their fellow citizens stand on abortion. Even now, most probably see Tennessee as extremist and unusual. But in truth, TN is fairly representative. It is my hope that young people entering the voting population continue to be strongly pro-life and vote to protect unborn children, and that the population as a whole can understand and embrace the (secret) pro-life norm. 

What do you think: could knowledge of the status quo position affect the extent to which people (particularly political moderates) accept pro-life views?

729 comments:

1 – 200 of 729   Newer›   Newest»
secularprolife.org said...

the youngest generation (you know, the one that just started voting) is most likely to say abortion should be illegal in all circumstances


That's not really surprising: they're also the age cohort least likely to have any direct knowledge of the need for free access to safe legal abortion as an essential human right.


For the men in that youngest generation, they may never grow out of it: they may only realise when a woman they care for (wife, daughter, grand-daughter) needs an abortion.


For the women in that youngest generation, I would guess that they are more likely to grow out of it as they learn to value themselves in an adult way: to realise that the prolife ideology is a misogynistic idea of forcing girls and women, and that this is neither good nor healthy.

secularprolife.org said...

What would be interesting is to see how the answers of the young ones have changed through out the years. Have they ALWAYS been more pro-life, relative to the older generation?

Also, I remember when I first learned what abortion was, probably when I was 15,6. At the time I thought it was cruel, surely something only the Republicans would favor. Only later when I looked beyond only the fetus and considered the reasons WHY people would have one, did I begin to realize that it was an important right to a procedure that is not always pretty or happy. Also learning my loving and infinitely patient mom had one, and I that she was working herself overtime all the time to make time for me and also her career, showed me first hand that people who have abortions are not horrible people.

secularprolife.org said...

If the youngest voters are the most pro-life, can pro-lifers support lowering the voting age? A win-win for young humans!

secularprolife.org said...

Many people might identify as pro life, but they won't vote to make abortion illegal.

secularprolife.org said...

Actually, wow, I just made the connection: the youngest voters are the most likely to be pro-life, with the oldest voters coming in second, and the most pro-choice cohort are middle-aged people.

I'd never realized so bluntly that the amount of age privilege a person has directly correlates to how likely they are to believe there should be an age requirement for the right to life.

secularprolife.org said...

This is interesting. If the younger people are pro-choice, it's because they're in touch and educated (same reason we see more young people supporting gay rights). If they're pro-life, it's because they're inexperienced. So how do you reconcile this perspective with one like gay rights? If young people are inexperienced and stupid, should we go with the older people on restricting gay rights?


In any case, I'm not sure how this whole "young people are just inexperienced" can jive with the fact that the oldest generation is also very pro-life. Should we listen to them because they're so experienced?

secularprolife.org said...

One in three women have hsd an abortion before they're 50.

Young people tend to be pro-equality for LGBT because they know other LGBT people as friends or the parents of their friends, so gay marriage is, they know, just what's right.

If young people knew how many of the older women they admired and respected - how many of their friends, sisters, girlfriends, their mothers and their friends' mothers - had hsd abortions, and that those women were able to say - as the vast majority of women who've had abortions do say: "Abortion was the right choice: I don't regret it" - I think it likely they would be as strongly against forcing girls snd women to have babies as they are against banning same-sex couples from getting married.

secularprolife.org said...

I admit this is quite interesting. Another gallup poll shows people who hold postgraduate degrees are almost 2x as likely to be pro-choice than pro-life, while those who hold only a highschool diploma are almost 2x as likely to be pro-life as pro-choice. Why the young, who are overwhelmingly in favor of progressive policies like marriage equality, seem to be pro-life, a stalwart position for the Religious Right?

One possible explanation might be that young people have met gay kids. Their friends may be gay, a relative might be gay. Gay people are visible. Abortion, on the other hand, is more a private matter, and older relatives may not be telling younger relatives about their own abortions. In this way, abortion is probably less an everyday part of life as gay people are. In my case, when I first learned what an abortion was, I thought it rather cruel. Only as I got older and realized the reasons people have abortions, and finding out my mom had one, did I accept it as a fundamental human right. I think as younger people experience having to work for a living, they will begin to understand what might go through the mind of a woman who chose abortion for economic reasons.

secularprolife.org said...

They should at least have the chance. Roe V Wade should be overturned.

secularprolife.org said...

What medical procedures of yours do we get to vote on?

secularprolife.org said...

According to the chart that is used with this article, young people aren't the "most likely" in any category. OOPS. Furthermore, there is no part of my life in which I would willingly cede control to an 18 year old. NONE! You people MUST be shrooming.

secularprolife.org said...

I have been a life-long pro-choice person (even before there was such a thing as choice) for precisely that reason. Abortion became a part of my life at the age of ten when my mother had one to save her life. I didn't fully appreciate the idea at that age, I just couldn't understand why the doctors wouldn't help mom until she was literally at death's door and I was angry about that. I had no care for something that was never going to be a baby. I just wanted my mom back. No child should have to face a crisis like that.

secularprolife.org said...

Your mom was a courageous woman who raised a great son. You make me wish I knew her.

secularprolife.org said...

Agreed. However, you won't find much support for that on this blog, which I am learning is not really pro-life at all, but a place where pro-abortion types hang around.



Can you recommend any pro-life blogs that are really pro-life? Thanks in advance.

secularprolife.org said...

Hey, adultist asshole, would you mind staying far, far away from me (a child abuse survivor) forever?

secularprolife.org said...

A link would be quite helpful to determine the margin of error in this poll, expressed as +/- x points. It may be statistically non-significant from other groups. And regardless of whether you believe children should be voting or not, there is no reasonable basis on which to believe they should. Your charges of "adultism" notwithstanding. There's a reason we don't allow children to vote, marry, enter contracts, or enter the military. They aren't "cooked enough" yet to make such life-affecting decisions. And there is no benefit to society in allowing them to do so. On the positive side, I ALSO don't think children should be treated as adults in criminal matters, either.

secularprolife.org said...

My uterus is not a democratic organization.

secularprolife.org said...

PROVE IT. Both my 20 something girls are pro reproductive privacy and autonomy for women.

secularprolife.org said...

No, they shouldn't. For all the talk of 'saving children,' there's little concern for the welfare of a woman's other kids. The only time they're ever mentioned is when someone simpers 'Well, how would they feel knowing their sibling was 'murdered?'

As usual, you get right to the point: The most important thing in the world to you was that your mother was safe and alive. But hey, you were only one of her 'born' children; why should you have mattered?

secularprolife.org said...

That's OK. Pro-aborts are just increasing traffic on this web site and getting the site bumped up in the rankings :) RH Reality Check (a pro-abort web-site) has likely seen their traffic slowed.


Liveactionnews usually bans pro-aborts that resort to insults and vulgarity to try to get their point across. Pretty sure that some pro-aborts on this page have been banned. Here is a recent news article from them: http://liveactionnews.org/new-jersey-news-cast-reacts-to-graphic-abortion-images/ Hope to see you over there :)

secularprolife.org said...

I would think that the anti-choice young people are this way because they have been raised this way. They have been taught that women are inferior and it is their job to pop out kids.

Once they get out in the real world and start to understand how things really are a lot of them will switch positions.

secularprolife.org said...

Is there another one that kills about 1 million unborn children a year?

secularprolife.org said...

Well said.

secularprolife.org said...

And then go on to write great blogs about their transformation:

The spring of my sophomore year of college I was president of my university’s Students for Life chapter. The fall of my junior year of college I cut my ties with the pro-life movement. Five years later I have lost the last shred of faith I had in that movement. This is my story.

Read more: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfeminism/2012/10/how-i-lost-faith-in-the-pro-life-movement.html#ixzz3IxbzL0St

secularprolife.org said...

Thanks, Plum.

secularprolife.org said...

Anyone with a brain knows that abortion restrictions aren't about controlling a uterus, they are about protecting vulnerable human beings from being killed. Looks like selfishness ('my terus') often clouds people's judgement.

secularprolife.org said...

Abortion restrictions are about controlling a woman and her body 100%. It is about punishing her for having sex.
Abortion restrictions are only there because anti-choicers view women as inferior property and they want to control us.

secularprolife.org said...

Schifosa.

secularprolife.org said...

You do not say much compared to some. But when you do say something, it is a blockbuster.

secularprolife.org said...

What plum said, u n*zi sloot

secularprolife.org said...

Abortion protects vulnerable human beings.

secularprolife.org said...

Your last point is valid, but if you look at how many believe "Legal under any circumstances", the youth look like quite pro-choice, as the numbers are more in-line with the middle-aged than the oldest. And as lady_black says, we need Error bars and also a the size of the samples, ie how many people were asked, to determine whether these results are statistically significant.


Also, how does being a child abuse victim

secularprolife.org said...

Living kills more than that. I do not see abortion in here anywhere.

THE TOP THREE CAUSES OF DEATH BY AGE GROUP

0 to 1 year:
Developmental and genetic conditions that were present at birth
Conditions due to premature birth (short gestation)
Sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS)

1 to 4 years:
Accidents
Developmental and genetic conditions that were present at birth
Homicide

5 to 9 years:
Accidents
Cancer
Developmental and genetic conditions that were present at birth

10 to 14 years:
Accidents
Cancer
Suicide

15 to 24 years
Accidents
Suicide
Homicide

There are almost twice as many deaths in the first year of life as there are in the next 13 years combined. Then, the death rate rises rapidly after puberty because of the large number of accidents, homicides, and suicides in the 15 to 24 age group. These three causes of death in teens should all be preventable.

secularprolife.org said...

Abortion kills way more unborn children than the number of children that die every year in the U.S.


And, medical 'procedures' aren't designed to kill born children. So your stats didn't even come close to answering my question.

secularprolife.org said...

Nope.. abortion restrictions are about saving the lives of unborn children.

secularprolife.org said...

No they aren't. They are about punishing women for having sex. You people do not care about the life of the ZEF once it is born. All you people want to do is force a woman to have a kid she doesn't want and then if she tries to get help she is a sIut who shouldn't of had sex if she can't afford to take care of the kid.

secularprolife.org said...

Prove it. Abortion does not appear once in child mortality statistics. I will wait until you find the proof that abortion kills children.

secularprolife.org said...

The 'monster' is the rapist, not the unborn child.


What if a rape victim has the child and then decides he or she looks too much like the father - can she kill then? Sure there's adoption, but what if the thought of the "devil's spawn" being out there drives the woman towards madness - can she use that as an excuse to kill? Or can she GET HELP so that she can give the child up for adoption and then MOVE ON with her life?


Rebecca Kessling was born from rape. Want to tell her she never should have been born?

secularprolife.org said...

I never said abortion kills children. It kills UNBORN children. Learn to read.

secularprolife.org said...

What is the difference?

secularprolife.org said...

My 12 year old gets pregnant from rape and we go straight to the doctor for an abortion. A 12 year old is unlikely to survive a birth.
What a pukefest you are.
I discuss public health. Not the ravings of impaired mind. I have made my point.

secularprolife.org said...

Non-responsive.

As usual.

secularprolife.org said...

Citation needed. For all of it.

secularprolife.org said...

Oh, but you insist that a zygote is the same as an infant. So, why aren't abortions included in the list of child mortality?

Could it be because ::wait for it:: there is no such thing as an unborn child?

secularprolife.org said...

You can go be part of the Calvin Freakburger circle jerk at LieSiteSpews; you'll fit right in.

secularprolife.org said...

Anyone with a brain knows that abortion restrictions aren't about controlling a uterus,

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

secularprolife.org said...

You're delusional.

Which we already knew.

secularprolife.org said...

I was *profoundly* anti-choice when I was a teen. I always say, flippantly, that this was the case until I got out of high school. What happened was that, for a variety of reasons, I learned that life is not as black-and-white as teens tend to think it is.

I suspect most of those anti-choice teens will wise up.

secularprolife.org said...

I think you will find that most anti-choice people are under-educated. It has nothing to do with age and everything to do with information.

secularprolife.org said...

So much hate from you.

secularprolife.org said...

Of course, you don't ask your sycophant, Plum Dumpling, for a citation. I suspect that is because you are really not interested in knowledge and truth.

secularprolife.org said...

Citation?

secularprolife.org said...

For what?

secularprolife.org said...

Never said an unborn child was a child. They are both human beings though.

Yes, "Unborn child" is a valid term. Want to tell a woman whose boyfriend just poisoned and killed her unborn child that she shouldn't grieve, it was just a 'clump of cells'?

Want to go to this website and comment that they shouldn't say "baby that dies in the womb"? maybe they can reword the article and call the unborn child a 'clump of cells'.. They accept disqus comments. Go for it. Show the grieving women who go to that website how evil you are: http://dying.lovetoknow.com/Grieving_Unborn_Baby

secularprolife.org said...

Nope... women are just doing it earlier, going out of state, or DIY ways.

secularprolife.org said...

Postgraduate degree holders are almost 2x more likely to be pro-choice.


Highschool graduates are almost 2x more likely to be pro-life.



http://www.gallup.com/poll/154946/non-christians-postgrads-highly-pro-choice.aspx

secularprolife.org said...

You're sick. All you care about are precious brainless zefs, the sanctity of your cunt, and you getting to enjoy as much comfort as possible. You'd force a twelve year old rape victim to give birth, because he head isn't as cute as the widdle embwyo's, you'd kill an innocent man who was being mind controlled by an evil scientist, for violating your precious cunt, and you'd dismember an innocent accident victim, so that you could steal his kidney.


Do you care about anyone or anything except yourself, your sacred holy cunt, and the widdle embwyos sucking their widdle thumbies?

secularprolife.org said...

"kid" is a valid term. Can I roast an 8 year old boy or girl alongside a young goat in my oven?

secularprolife.org said...

She skeeves me too.

secularprolife.org said...

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/001915.htm

secularprolife.org said...

Oops! I bet he wasn't expecting that!

secularprolife.org said...

this is laughable, you nuts trying to take away our rights not only read polls the way you want to read them, but you had to go out of your way to find a really old poll that came close to what you nutjobs wanted.. here's a real updated poll.


go the fk away, shut up and stay out of my and my daughters' uteruses.
from polling reports.com

secularprolife.org said...

a fetus is not a human being and you nutjobs trying to demand what we do with our body yet you don't give a damn what happens after a baby is born, aka heathcare, education and child care.. you're all disgusting and vile.

secularprolife.org said...

Ass plans to have a purity fight right here. You cannot make this shit up.

secularprolife.org said...

She really is one of the darkest, most malignant personalities I've ever had the displeasure to come across online or IRL. I'm not a big believer in 'evil,' per se, but if anyone has ever caused me to rethink that, Mathilde has.

secularprolife.org said...

For some people that's what it's about. Not you, though.

secularprolife.org said...

So what's your killing of a poor brain controlled man about? Saving the sanctity of your precious genitals? Why are you the only one who gets to kill innocent human beings?

secularprolife.org said...

If you really wanted to save the lives of the pwecious childwen, like over half a million of them a year, you'd be advocating relegalizing DDT. Oh, wait. You only care about widdle embwyoes, not real children who die of malaria, because once they're born, they've served their real purpose of punishing the mother for sex.

secularprolife.org said...

The 'youngest generation' thinks abortion should be illegal. In other words, people still living off mommy and daddy's paycheck and have no idea what life is like for those who have to actually work for a living and pay for their own homes, cars, utilities and medical care. And they are supposed to be authorities on the consequences of sticking someone with a $250,000 unwanted child because why? Sad feelies?

secularprolife.org said...

I'm guessing you don't get laid much.

secularprolife.org said...

You don't support abortion to help 12 year old victims of rape.

secularprolife.org said...

For most pro-lifers, pro-life laws are about saving the lives of unborn children. For most pro-aborts, abortions are about placing wants and desires above the life of another human being.

secularprolife.org said...

There have been people that have gone from pro-abortion to pro-life too as they mature and see that an unborn child is, in fact, a human being.

secularprolife.org said...

An unborn child IS a human being. A 'clump of cells' does not magically transform into a human being on a trip down the birth canal.


What's "disgusting and vile" is killing a human being for 15 minutes of fame (Emily Letts), killing a unborn child to hide the results of a affair and even killing because a woman cannot afford a child (if she cannot kill her newborn for that reason, she shouldn't be able to kill her unborn child either).


Most pro-lifers DO care about born children - they donate time and money to help FAMILIES in need, not just pregnant women.

secularprolife.org said...

Polls also show that most people want abortion generally illegal after 20 weeks and the only one I could find for abortion after 12 weeks showed that 64% want abortion generally illegal after 12 weeks. That means that a majority of people in this country have a fundamental disagreement with Roe V Wade. Overturning Roe V Wade is the first step in giving unborn children a basic right to life.

secularprolife.org said...

Here's another one. Stanford College Republicans asked Stanford students their stances on various issues. About 12% say they are strictly pro-life, with 20% saying they are pro-life but with restrictions. That brings pro-life and moderate pro-life to about 30% of the undergrad population.

http://stanfordreview.org/old_archives/Archive/Volume_XXX/Issue_6/Front_Page/frontpage2.shtml

secularprolife.org said...

Oh, hardly.

secularprolife.org said...

You know why I support abortion without asking me? Another nut.

secularprolife.org said...

I think increasing traffic on this site is a great idea. Why wouldn't I?

secularprolife.org said...

I mentioned being an abuse survivor in the hopes that it might convince lady_black to grow a conscience, but yes, being an abuse survivor most certainly helps one to recognize when attitudes that facilitate abuse are present! Do you actually dispute this?

secularprolife.org said...

I don't see how not giving children who haven't yet completed their basic elementary education is an attitude that facilitates abuse, but. I think lady black is an individual with a well developed sense of ethics and morals. And her point that the poll results don't clearly show the young being prolife is also quite valid along with her questioning whether the results are statistically significnt.

secularprolife.org said...

Okay, disclaimer: I realize that to a certain extent I'm dropping Adultism 750 concepts on you before you've even taken Adultism 101. The feeling is similar to trying to explain why infant gender assignment is inherently transphobic to someone who's still going "I don't know if it really makes sense that a woman can become a man if he feels like it". But all that aside:

Granting all people the right to participate in the democratic process is something that is justified simply by the fact that children are subject to laws and government without the consent of the governed is unjust. But denying suffrage to a whole demographic of people also has obvious detriments in that those people's needs have no voice!

The juvenile justice system is actually rooted in hatred and fear of young people, and often denies them constitutional rights they would have if tried as adults. Read this article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-robert-epstein/juvenile-injustice-the-sc_b_173495.html Of particular note is Gerard Gault, who was sentenced to six years in detention for a crime that would have resulted in, at the most, two months of jail and a $50 fine had he been an adult.

Although I don't know how much of this is going to mean anything to you if you don't accept the basic premise that young people are treated unjustly because they are young. Next time you're talking with feminists about how women's speech patterns, interests, trends, etc. are treated as inherently less valuable or meaningful, note how often it is that specifically young women (and often young non-women assigned female) are targeted. Next time you see a list of the warning signs of abuse/behaviors that facilitate abuse, notice how many of them are completely normalized in parent/child relationships. Next time you hear people bring up how the culture and law enforcement make it difficult to escape an abusive domestic relationship, consider the fact that if it's your parent who's abusing you, in most states you can be dragged back by police without your consent.

secularprolife.org said...

Have you considered taking a remedial biology class? I highly recommend it for you.

secularprolife.org said...

I'm sorry that you're so very ignorant of the realities of biology. Again, I recommend a remedial course for you.

secularprolife.org said...

All of the bullshit you spewed in the post to which I was replying. I want to see rigorous, peer-reviewed proof for your claims.

I also want a flying pony; I figure that it's about the equivalent of your claims being valid.

secularprolife.org said...

With pleasure. http://www.gallup.com/poll/154946/non-christians-postgrads-highly-pro-choice.aspx

secularprolife.org said...

I find anti-choice males particularly despicable; you wave your paws in the air and make demand on the life and health of women that will never affect you. Talk about convenient!

secularprolife.org said...

Myintx' views are actually fairly representative of most of the pro lifers that I have interacted with. The others are more clever however, and they dress the same talking points up in fancy rhetoric.

secularprolife.org said...

Citation needed.

secularprolife.org said...

Ad hominem.

secularprolife.org said...

You do know that it's possible to support one cause, right?

secularprolife.org said...

You're a "mean old lady". Probably lots of cats. 55,000+ internet comments. Let's call it deductive reasoning.

secularprolife.org said...

thats b s. Many pro-lifers do care about families - after the children are born. They donate time and money to help FAMILIES. They also support adoption for women who don't want their children.

secularprolife.org said...

Nonsense. You do not reason.

secularprolife.org said...

You have made no points... If a woman's life is truly endangered from her pregnancy she should be able to have an abortion to save her life.


Most abortions have NOTHING to do with threats to a woman's health. They are done for avoidable reasons like "cannot afford a child" or "not the right time for a child". Those are great reasons for a woman to GET HELP from the many places that can help. They are HORRIBLE reasons to kill an unborn child.

secularprolife.org said...

I care about all innocent human beings. If an abortion is the only way to save a woman's life, I do support that.


You're the one who is sick. I think you even admitted it. Are postings like the one you just did a side effect of your condition?

secularprolife.org said...

You have made no points.

.........
LIAR.

secularprolife.org said...

If you didn't think my posts were on point you wouldn't be replying to them.

secularprolife.org said...

It is understandable if you don't see how the two are connected if you haven't spent time trying to understand adultism, although from my perspective it's kind of like believing that women being denied suffrage and women experiencing high rates of domestic abuse are just two random unrelated things. But if you actually want to understand, here are some resources:
Escape From Childhood by John Holt (book)
https://www.facebook.com/ISupportYouthRights
http://www.youthrights.org/
http://adultprivilege.tumblr.com, especially http://adultprivilege.tumblr.com/tagged/child-abuse

And lady_black believes intersex children should have their genitals mutilated without their consent in order to force them into the gender binary.

secularprolife.org said...

Wild applause.

secularprolife.org said...

That wasn't the point... Fiona said there was no such thing as an "unborn child". I proved there was. Guess you're backing me up too by saying "kid" is a valid term because it's in the dictionary. Thanks :)

secularprolife.org said...

Comparing unborn children to rapists again, Ann? You truly are sick.

secularprolife.org said...

Too big.

secularprolife.org said...

Boredom.

secularprolife.org said...

Meanwhile, RHRC loses traffic because you're on this site, lol


It is good for this site. A pro-life atheist who repeatedly gets lied to that only religious people are against abortion might find this web-site easier to find due to the increased traffic. There is lots of useful information on this site other than the blogs. And, not everyone reads the comments to the articles (if they did, they'd find that many pro-aborts are vulgar and evil though, so that would help too).

secularprolife.org said...

I have. Many scientists know that an unborn child is a human being too.

In 1981 (April 23-24) a Senate Judiciary Subcommittee held
hearings where they discussed when human life begins. Internationally-known geneticists and biologists spoke.

The official Senate report reached this conclusion:

“Physicians, biologists, and other scientists agree that conception marks the beginning of
the life of a human being – a being that is alive and is a member of the human
species. There is overwhelming agreement on this point in countless medical, biological, and scientific writings.”

secularprolife.org said...

Spell out what you need proof for. Do you really need proof that more unborn children die from abortion than born children die from all causes in the US every year? We do NOT have 1 million born children (under 18) dying every year in the US. If that's what you want a citation on, I'll find the number of born children that die every year.

secularprolife.org said...

Laws make demands of parents ALL THE TIME. That they send their kids to school, CARE for them, that they shouldn't KILL them, etc. Nothing wrong with laws protecting unborn children from being killed.

secularprolife.org said...

As I've said before, I have no desire to tell anyone they should never have been born. That is NOT the same thing as saying no woman should EVER be forced to bear a child, and especially so if the pregnancy resulted from a crime. I can't think of any other crime where the victim is forced to live with the results and would be denied medical treatment.

secularprolife.org said...

ROFLMAO!

secularprolife.org said...

You're brain is too small. It's about the UNBORN CHILD.

secularprolife.org said...

Then YOU gestate it. How's that.

secularprolife.org said...

Come anywhere near my child IN REAL LIFE and I will break your face.

secularprolife.org said...

Unless the woman's life is truly endangered from the pregnancy, abortion isn't "medical treatment" - it's the intentional killing of an unborn child.

secularprolife.org said...

You anti-choicers care about YOUR family. You do not care about the single or married little sIut who had sex because it is fun. You just want her to suffer because she had sex for a reason besides pregnancy.

If anti-choicers cared about the ZEF after it was born they wouldn't be trying to hard to reduce or eliminate funding for programs that help single women.

secularprolife.org said...

People need to take responsibility for their own children - born and unborn. If a woman wakes up one morning and decides she doesn't want her newborn and doesn't want to be bothered to call 911 for someone to come get the child, can she just walk out of the house and never look back? NO. She has a responsibility to her offspring. That responsibility should start when that tiny human being is created - at fertilization.

secularprolife.org said...

Do you really need proof that more unborn children die from abortion than born children die from all causes in the US every year?

..........
YES.

secularprolife.org said...

She called it a 'baby'.... If her 'baby' could choose, he or she would choose life, not death.

secularprolife.org said...

Plenty wrong. They do not work to control abortion. Women have abortions legal or illegal.

secularprolife.org said...

Me too. I want more people to meet these whackjob forced birthers.

secularprolife.org said...

Do you need remedial reading training as well as remedial biology? Go back and look at Your. Own. Post.

secularprolife.org said...

You know perfectly well that this is not a citation. ::shrug::

You also know perfectly well that a) the time of conception *cannot* be determined, and b) that many conceptii leave a woman's body with menses without her ever knowing about them>

So, you clearly are arguing that all tampons should be inspected to see whether or not they contain "human beings."

Jesus wept; the schools in Texas should all be sued for malpractice if you're an example of what they turn out.

secularprolife.org said...

She can call it Adolph is she wants. It is her fetus.
You can read a fetus mind? Of course you can. All forced birthers are whizzes at telepathy, clairvoyance and remote viewing.

secularprolife.org said...

The number of children who die every year in the US can be found here: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr63/nvsr63_03.pdf


PP alone kills more unborn children than the number of born children that die in the US every year.

secularprolife.org said...

Some people kill their born children and it's illegal... want to make killing born children legal because some people are stupid enough to kill even though it's against the law?

secularprolife.org said...

It is proof that many scientists are on my side - not yours -- as to when a human beings life begins.

secularprolife.org said...

lol.. it's you that's comparing her to a Nazi killer...


I can't read a newborns mind either. Doesn't mean a newborn can be killed if he or she is deemed unwanted or inconvenient. The vulnerable among us - including unborn children, born children and the elderly - need protection against selfish people that would kill them for being inconvenient/

secularprolife.org said...

You say 'anti-choicer' like it's a bad thing. If the 'choice' is killing a human being that has done nothing wrong, I'm proud to be anti-choice and anti-abortion (against the killing of unborn children). Are you proud to be pro-abortion - for the killing of unborn children?


Pro-life laws are about PROTECTING unborn children. Not about punishing. Are laws saying a woman or an abortionist cannot kill a newborn born as a result of a botched abortion 'punishing' a woman for waiting too long to have an abortion? Sure she can give the baby up for adoption, but she might be hounded for medical bills and might suffer mentally for giving the baby up for adoption. Can she use those as lame excuses to kill her newborn and say "they are trying to punish me... boo hoo".? NO


Many pro-lifers do support places that help FAMILIES, not just pregnant women. And many pro-lifers support politicians who want to work to get the economy going so that people can get back to work and support their own families.

secularprolife.org said...

It's proof of exactly nothing. Of which you are also aware.

If you had two functioning brain cells and a synapse firing between them, you would realize that life is a continuum.

secularprolife.org said...

MurderPorn.

secularprolife.org said...

It is a bad thing to be an anti-choicer. You people think women are nothing but worthless baby machines. I am proud to be pro-choice because it means I support women and their right to do what they feel is best for their life. Little myintx doesn't get to decide for them or for me.

Anti-choice laws are about forcing women into gestational slavery by making an abortion harder to her. No matter how much you try to make it so a newborn is not the same as a ZEF.

Anti-choicers are about protecting the corporations and the wealthy. They do not care about the "lower classes".

secularprolife.org said...

You're angry.

secularprolife.org said...

Where does it say that in the report?

secularprolife.org said...

Sometimes.

secularprolife.org said...

I can tell.

secularprolife.org said...

No it should not. We don't force women to parent after birth, and we can't force them to parent before birth, either. That is what you are suggesting. When a woman, or couple take the newborn home from the hospital, they are accepting parenthood. They do not suddenly wake up one day and decide they want a mulligan on the whole thing, and walk out never to return. That would be an indication of some sort of mental disorder, and should be looked at on an individual basis. And certainly the child should be placed into foster care if the parents have left it unattended. The thing is, if she doesn't wish to parent, she is never forced to start parenting. She can refuse the infant and leave it at the hospital. Or she can give birth at home and call 911 and the paramedics will respond quickly and take the infant away. She probably needs, at minimum, a check-up for herself to make sure she's ok. Just GIVE IT UP, myintx. You can't force women to remain pregnant, no matter why or for what twisted reasons you wish to. Another woman's pregnancy is none of your affair, and there are federal laws protecting her medical privacy. You are entitled to ZERO information.

secularprolife.org said...

Yes, it's medical treatment.

secularprolife.org said...

I don't care.

secularprolife.org said...

The Tennessee amendment is under further review. It seems that the votes weren't counted correctly. Voting for a constitutional amendment is subject to also voting for a governor. Meaning those who attempted to "cook the books" by voting for amendment 1 and not voting for governor didn't cast valid votes. We'll wait to see what the outcome will be.

secularprolife.org said...

Yeah, it doesn't matter what "most people want" when it comes to medical matters. It's none of "most people's" damn business. The tragedy of learning at the 20 week ultrasound that what you're carrying will never be that baby you wanted due to defects incompatible with life shouldn't be compounded by strangers sticking their noses in, ala Terri Schiavo.

secularprolife.org said...

Who's uterus is it, myintx?

secularprolife.org said...

In between "woman" and "newborn" is a long process, fraught with issues and problems, known as "gestation." You don't get to hand-wave away all other issues, including the quality of life for the woman and her existing children, and indeed their very existence, just because you see gestation as "no problem."

secularprolife.org said...

There is NEVER "the right time" for a 12 year old rape victim to be forced to have a child. And incidentally, any given pregnant 12 year old has been raped. That's a fact. Deal with it. No 12 year old of mine would ever be forced to gestate. EVER.

secularprolife.org said...

A human being's life is a continuum - one that starts at fertilization and ends in death - hopefully a natural death after a long life.

secularprolife.org said...

Anger is a natural reaction to people who would insist that any young girl or woman should be forced to gestate and give birth.

secularprolife.org said...

I know the number of children who died (it's in the report). The CDC gets data on the number of abortions. Two numbers are easily comparable.... :)

secularprolife.org said...

Compare them.You made the assertion. You must support it. I am waiting.

secularprolife.org said...

FYI: it's under Obama, a pro-abort, that the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. "Under President Obama, the richest 10 percent were the only income group of Americans to see their median incomes rise, according to a survey released this week by the Federal Reserve." (September 2014)


A newborn is the same human being he or she was before birth - just at a different stage of development. Neither should be killed because they are inconvenient or unwanted.

secularprolife.org said...

I'm truly sorry you suffered from child abuse. Unfortunately for you there is no direct line between your childhood and either my conscience OR the matter of giving adult rights to children. I don't NEED to grow a conscience. The one I was born with is more than adequate. Neither one contributes to the abuse of children in any way. Children are a special case under the law. They're dependent upon the rest of society to meet their needs. We can't treat them as adult citizens with the same legal rights, because they aren't capable of the adult responsibility that goes along with those rights. I don't care to entertain any of your babbling about the "mutilation" of children through surgery they didn't consent to. Children do not make medical decisions. I (sort of) see your point about the intersex, and I would choose not to alter that if it were my own child. In my mind, there's too much chance of making a mistake. Neither would I consent to gender-reassignment surgery for a trans-gender child, because that's something that s/he can decide for him/herself when she is an adult. You must understand that those parents who do assign sex to their intersex children are doing what they believe is best, with the consultation of doctors. Nobody is perfect. Not parents, and not doctors either. But they're the best thing we have.

secularprolife.org said...

Ultrasounds have been wrong before. After 16 weeks many women have abortions for the same reasons they have them before 16 weeks. AVOIDABLE ones.

secularprolife.org said...

Do you really need proof that more unborn children die from abortion than born children die from all causes in the US every year?
..........
YES. But not what you stated above. I limit it to the leading causes of death of children in the material I provided, if you like.

secularprolife.org said...

"The same human being before birth as after birth"
*Pictures myintx walking around attached to a huge placenta.* No. Not the same.

secularprolife.org said...

A woman with just born children could have 'quality of life' issues and be worried about mental stress from putting a child she cannot afford into the system. Doesn't justify killing.... Most issues a woman has while pregnant don't justify killing either.

secularprolife.org said...

It's about the unborn child.

secularprolife.org said...

The fact is that she CAN hand off a born child. Nothing about suffering from having done it. One cannot hand off a pregnancy to another.

secularprolife.org said...

Pregnancy is not a disease.

secularprolife.org said...

Answer the question. Does my uterus belong to:
1) Me.
2) You.
3) The state.

secularprolife.org said...

It certainly isn't a state of wellness.

secularprolife.org said...

Neither is flat chest surgery or a ton of other medical treatments.

secularprolife.org said...

If it were natural, more of the population would feel the way you do. Reality is, they don't. Hence, the above article.

secularprolife.org said...

Yes you do. You keep replying. Like clockwork.

secularprolife.org said...

Your point?

secularprolife.org said...

That she's angry.

secularprolife.org said...

Bye.

secularprolife.org said...

And?

secularprolife.org said...

Everyone gets angry sometimes. Even you.

secularprolife.org said...

I love that sign!

secularprolife.org said...

Yep, you definitely need a remedial course in biology.

secularprolife.org said...

Don't care about your uterus. Abortion laws are about UNBORN CHILDREN

secularprolife.org said...

She has to take the TIME to hand off a born child... She can take the TIME to give birth and hand off the baby after it's born.

secularprolife.org said...

Like clockwork.

secularprolife.org said...

myintx or her twin.

http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/2014/08/are-they-prostitutes-asks.html

secularprolife.org said...

I collect them. They are to the point.

secularprolife.org said...

Ooooh. The Internet thug/bully/badass Plump Dumbling is making more threats.

secularprolife.org said...

I sure hope the Plump Dumbling does not have cats! I'd feel very sorry for the cats.

secularprolife.org said...

I find pro-abortion females particularly despicable. You wave your paws in the air and make demand on the life of unborn children. Talk about convenient.

secularprolife.org said...

You should see a psychiatrist about your sick fantasies, Plump Dumbling.

secularprolife.org said...

Yeah, good point. RHRC is a hate site.

secularprolife.org said...

Have you considered taking a remedial logic class? You seem unable to do any independent reasoning; you seem to follow the pro-abortion talking points very closely.

secularprolife.org said...

Get some new lines, 'fiona'.

secularprolife.org said...

So much gaslighting and projection. You should seek counseling to see why you feel the need to do that.

secularprolife.org said...

All children, everywhere, have been born.

Maybe you can sit next to myintx during remedial biology class.

secularprolife.org said...

I'll consider counseling after you get counseling for your "gaslighting" and 'projection' of

myintx. Why do you need to do that, pro-abortion troll?

secularprolife.org said...

So many pro-abortion trolls here. Unreal.

secularprolife.org said...

Please define "troll"

secularprolife.org said...

So you don't consider women to be people?

secularprolife.org said...

Sorry but you do not get to control my uterus...

secularprolife.org said...

Nope. It doesn't take nine months to hand off a newborn. You just walk into any hospital, and hand it to the first staff member you see. It doesn't matter if it's the cleaning lady, or the old lady sitting at the information desk. If they work there, they'll know what to do.

secularprolife.org said...

Where are "unborn children," myintx? Other than in your imagination?

secularprolife.org said...

Promoting your own website... sad.

secularprolife.org said...

He said 'unborn children'. Maybe you need to sit in on a reading comprehension class.

secularprolife.org said...

We already have laws to prevent killing women because someone deems them inconvenient or unwanted.

secularprolife.org said...

I'm pretty sure the majority of people would be angry at anyone who said their raped 12 year old must give birth. That's a really natural parental attitude for the mentally healthy. Of course, there are exceptions to mental clarity. You, for example. You are one sick puppy if you would do that to your daughter, or granddaughter.

secularprolife.org said...

Actually, pro lifers consider women to be inconvenient compared to the all important zef.

secularprolife.org said...

I never said it took 9 months to hand off a newborn. The point is legally she has to SAFELY hand off her baby - even if she is at home and that takes more than 2 seconds. If she has to wait in other circumstances, a pregnant woman can WAIT until her baby is born so she can SAFELY hand him or her over to someone.

secularprolife.org said...

Post viability abortion laws PROTECT unborn children. We should be able to have laws to protect unborn children before viability as well.

secularprolife.org said...

There aren't any "trolls" here. And I have yet to meet someone who's "pro-abortion." Even women who've had them.

secularprolife.org said...

Nope. It's not about "waiting" and you know it. She doesn't have to wait for anything.

secularprolife.org said...

Nope

secularprolife.org said...

I call my cat "baby." I also call my husband "baby." That doesn't mean they're really babies. My daughter called her fetus "my little parasite." The doctor laughed and told her she was right. The woman in that picture appears to have decided to go through with her pregnancy. She's obviously pro-choice. She also obviously wants a child. I'm delighted for her.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 729   Newer› Newest»