Only pregnant women seek abortions. Gender reassignment doesn’t include a uterus at this point in scientific discovery.
My blog, my rules.
No uterus = no opinion.
If you’re going to take a page that was meant to be funny and make it all technical and shit, find another sandbox to play in. Jesus titty fucking Christ. Nobody is phobic about a motherfucking thing. In the quest for simplicity, I use the generic term “woman”, because frankly, this sucks enough of my time as is. *eyeroll*
yes, because typing the phrase “pregnant person” is SO much more difficult than typing “woman.” it’s really not that hard to be inclusive. but if you want to be a jerk about it I’ll just block you to keep from seeing your transphobic ass in the abortion tag anymore.
It’s all well and good to make fun of pro lifers, but you specifically seem to assume that trans* men need to have a uterus transplanted. Trans men are men who were born with a uterus. They are affected by abortion laws.
Non binary folk can be born with a uterus too.
I have a uterus, I get a say by your own words and I am not a woman.
By refusing to change your language to include trans and NB folk who have a uterus like myself you ARE transphobic. By trying to deny the transphobia when you are being called out on it makes you as bad as men who say ‘I’m not sexist for thinking a woman’s place is in the kitchen!’.
Accept that you made a transphobic statement especially just now, attempted to defend the transphobic comment, apologise for the cissexism, alter your behaviour to be inclusive and less transphobic and move on. People will like you better and you grow as a person.
Just to chime in: I work for NARAL and we do advocate for all people who have uteri. We do lots of work with LGBTQ communities and recognize that abortion and repo health care is an intersectional issue that impacts many different people in different ways. Not everyone we advocate for is a white woman, and we try to make that known.
Although many of our social media posts do include gendered language, it’s something we’re working on and we’re also doing what we can to impact legislation in ways that include all people with uteri.
Wanted to share more on this^^
It’s really not hard to say pregnant person. “Person” is just one more letter longer so it’s not like it’s incredibly arduous to type.
This is bullshit, and I’m disappointed to see it. Anyone can be affected by abortion rights restrictions, not just cis straight women with uteruses.
I’m uncomfortable with some of the things I’ve seen from prolifepublicshaming, but namely (until now) it’s the publishing of criminal records unconnected to anti-choicers’ activism and/or cause — even if it is detestable. Shame them for trying to rip away reproductive rights, not for bouncing a check years ago. Now, if said anti-choice charmer has a record for say, attacking clinics or staff, that’s a different story. I believe these people MUST be called out for those actions, along with their persistent dissemination of misinformation.
However, seeing both sides of the bars doesn’t necessarily make you a bad person, it makes you a person who was jailed for allegedly doing a bad thing.
And a pregnancy doesn’t make you a woman, it makes you a person who is pregnant.
And, according to this anti-choice charmer, everyone has the right to get hit by a truck.
These comments are from CBS’ story on the recent case of a pregnant, brain-dead Texas woman’s family being allowed to remove life support. She was kept alive against her wishes, and those of her family, because the hospital applied a Texas law stating life support may not be withdrawn from a pregnant person if the fetus is viable.
The judge did not interpret the constitutionality of the law, only ruling that because the fetus was severely abnormal, life support could be withdrawn — meaning a situation like this could happen again.
These comments were one of hundreds calling for the execution of her husband. This sums up why I use “anti-choice” versus “pro-life.” They are anti-people-having-a-choice. All they cared about was the possibility that the fetus be born. Nothing about this woman’s wishes, or the potential suffering of that child should it be born alive. Not one of them voiced concern for the suffering of her family, as they watched a woman they all loved be used as an incubator by the state.
If you want to talk about “playing God,” well, then this woman and her unborn child died last year in November. She was kept “alive” by man, by machines that created an illusion of life. Basically, this woman sums up the hypocrisy of the “pro-life” movement nicely: “Everyone has the right to be born, but if you do shit I don’t like after you’re born, I don’t care if you get hit by a truck!”
[Image text]: “Every health benefit policy that is delivered, issued, executed, or renewed in this state or approved for issuance or renewal in this state by the Insurance Commissioner on or after the effective date of this subchapter that provides coverage for prescription drugs on an outpatient basis shall provide coverage for prescribed drugs or devices approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration for use as a contraceptive.”
Behold, the Equity in Prescription Insurance and Contraceptive Coverage Act, signed by then-Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee in 2005. A rational law, mandating the coverage of contraception by health insurance providers in Arkansas.
Fast forward nine years later, and government mandates about contraceptive coverage are because “Uncle Sugar” thinks women are libidinous moochers. So which is it, Mike Huckabee?
One of the sad byproducts of the media conspiracy to ignore this week’s pro-life conference in Washington was that we almost missed this new iPhone app for baby-savin’. If only we’d seen it on Wednesday, we could’ve told you how much it sucked sooner.
You know what’s missing from this story? ANITA Perry saying she misspoke on a woman’s right to choose. Actually, Rick, she seemed pretty clear. Rick Perry speaking for his wife to the press like this tells you all you need to know about his attitude towards women.
Ironic As Hell GOP Ad Against Obamacare Says The Government Should Stay Out of Womens’ Vaginas (Unless The Government Is Republican)
NOTE: This article was written by Jezebel's Erin Gloria Ryan.
Now that Obamacare’s implementation is all but inevitable, conservatives are doing all sorts of nutty shit to try to stop it at the last minute. They’re threatening to shut down the whole government over it, which is the political equivalent of cutting off one’s head to spite one’s face. They’re filing a metric crapton of lawsuits against it. But my favorite conservative freak out is where they tell people not to sign up for it — with this unbelievably ironic video aimed at young women. “Obamacare is letting the government into your vag!” says the party of the transvaginal ultrasound. Let’s go on a journey through the destruction of irony, like, as a concept.
Here are other ways that this ad is among the most hilariously self-implicating pieces of propaganda:
"OPT OUT" as the name of a conservative-helmed program when, like, it’s written right into the GOP’s platform that women who become pregnant should not be able to OPT OUT or pregnancy. Other things women seeking abortions would not be able to "OPT OUT" of, if the conservative party had its way: listening to a fetal heartbeat, looking at a fetal ultrasound, a transvaginal ultrasound, a condescending lecture from a doctor about scientifically debunked non-dangers of abortion. One proposed Texas law suggested women who seek abortions should have to take a mandatory adoption class. OPTING OUT!
"Don’t let the government play doctor," says the tag line of an ad created by the same people who do exactly that, like, fucking constantly.
Uncle Sam long ago became young women’s creepy uncle when the government first got into all this vagina policing in the first place.
Remember when Rick Santorum was all “birth control pills give women a license to ‘do things’” and by “things” he meant “fuck”? Creeeee-pyyyyy.
What if we replaced the soundtrack of this ad with Republicans talking about female bodies? It would actually be a better ad.
Planned Parenthood responded swiftly and without pity. Here’s a statement from Eric Ferrero, VP of Communications for PPFA,
“It is hard to tell if this is real or if it’s a ‘Saturday Night Live’ parody about the hypocrisy of extremists who want to be in every exam room in America but don’t want to expand access to quality health care. These are the same extreme Koch-funded political groups who have tried to pass transvaginal ultrasound laws and other laws allowing politicians to interfere with people’s personal medical decisions. These videos are the height of hypocrisy, but more importantly they are irresponsible and dangerous, designed to spread misinformation and discourage people from getting access to high quality, affordable health care.”
Guys. Guys. This ad contains literally the most projection I’ve ever seen, and the other day stood next to a train to a male hipster reading Oscar Wilde who whispered “fag” under his breath as a trans woman deboarded. This is madness.
So, no group supports abortion clinic bombings ideologically?
Ever heard of an organization named Army of God? Click the last two photos in the set to view the pages listing Scott Roeder as an “American Hero” and murderers, arsonists, and bombers as “Heroes of the Faith.”
Really, stop trying to bend over backwards to exclude anti-choice terrorists as TERRORISTS. What do you call a man like Clay Waagner, who mailed over 200+ threatening letters, supposedly containing anthrax, to Planned Parenthood clinic? What, is he just a prankster?
This lone wolf bullshit needs to stop. Christians bombing abortion clinics in the name of God are terrorists. Muslims who commit bombing in the name of Allah — same thing. The biggest difference is that every time an incident of terrorism motivated by extremist anti-choice ideology takes place, Christian pro-life groups aren’t forced to launch a media blitz to clarify that the terrorist does not represent Christians.
Muslims do not get the same courtesy in the U.S. If an act of terrorism is even speculated to be committed by a Muslim, the media immediately demands Muslim-Americans roundly condemn the attacks and explain how that person is not a Muslim — this, of course, operates under the Islamophobic notion that EVERY MUSLIM EVERYWHERE supports the terrorist acts of the very, very few.
Scott Roeder, Army of God? Eh, lone wolf, not a real Christian, etc.
Just stop. This is not a hypothesis you can defend and still be a decent goddamn human being.
Hi I’m panicking right now because I think I may be pregnant and I have no means for an abortion and it’s early enough for an abortion pill but it costs around $300-$800 and I don’t have that kind of money. Is there anything I can do because I know planned parenthood still makes you pay. Please if your followers have any suggestions about what I can do monetary wise it would be a big help.
First, call the closest clinic to you. Ask if they know about private funds. Explain your situation. If they can’t help, call as far away as you can feasibly travel if you have to — they’re usually willing to direct you. Make sure you are not calling a crisis pregnancy center — these places will mislead you. Also, try the state chapter of NARAL where you live.
Followers, feel free to chime in! In your case, it sounds like there’s time to get around most restrictions, but not much. I hope this helps. If it doesn’t, write me back here or at my email, firstname.lastname@example.org and we’ll see what we can dig up.
This is crazy… As a physician, I don’t make laws, since I’m not qualified. By the same token, legislators should stay the fuck out of making (bad) medical decisions for women.
Dr. T, posting on my friend’s Facebook about the Indiana legislature’s consideration of another mandatory ultrasound bill that would not only demand transvaginal ultrasounds before certain types of abortion, it would also mandate another unnecessary transvaginal ultrasound two weeks later.
Testimony in favor of the bill culminated with Indiana Right to Life Director Sue Swayze saying she “doesn’t understand the problem with the procedure. I got pregnant vaginally. Something else could come in my vagina for a medical test that wouldn’t be that intrusive to me. So I find that argument a little ridiculous.” I dare her to say that to someone who is a survivor of rape.
This is like saying since she herself once consented to sex, she’s consented to have sex with everyone because that’s not intrusive. Not to mention being penetrated by a hard plastic probe in a doctor’s office usually differs from consensual sex. Oh, and did the state legislature dictate the position and manner that you and your partner were to use to conceive? Oh, no, because that’s a private choice, amirite?
The physician above nails it. Doctors should care for patients without legislators mandating how it should be done or denying patients care they seek from qualified physicians.
Apparently it took a female Republican to come up with the most vicious way to punish women who had the audacity to get themselves raped.
Wednesday, state representative Cathrynn Brown of New Mexico introduced a bill whose sheer audacity makes Todd Akin look as harmless as an ill-informed teenager groping his way through puberty.
The proposed legislation, House Bill 206, would make it illegal for a woman to have an abortion after being raped because the fetus is evidence of the crime. A women who does choose to have an abortion would be charged with the third-degree felony of “tampering with evidence,” which carries up to a three year prison sentence in New Mexico.
As the bill states:
"Tampering with evidence shall include procuring or facilitating an abortion, or compelling or coercing another to obtain an abortion, of a fetus that is the result of criminal sexual penetration or incest with the intent to destroy evidence of the crime."
But when it came to mounting a defense in the Stodghill case, Catholic Health’s lawyers effectively turned the Church directives on their head. Catholic organizations have for decades fought to change federal and state laws that fail to protect “unborn persons,” and Catholic Health’s lawyers in this case had the chance to set precedent bolstering anti-abortion legal arguments. Instead, they are arguing state law protects doctors from liability concerning unborn fetuses on grounds that those fetuses are not persons with legal rights.
As Jason Langley, an attorney with Denver-based Kennedy Childs, argued in one of the briefs he filed for the defense, the court “should not overturn the long-standing rule in Colorado that the term ‘person,’ as is used in the Wrongful Death Act, encompasses only individuals born alive. Colorado state courts define ‘person’ under the Act to include only those born alive. Therefore Plaintiffs cannot maintain wrongful death claims based on two unborn fetuses.”
"Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person - among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life." — Catechism of the Catholic Church
This quote from the Catechism of the Catholic Church is a key pillar of current lawsuits against the contraceptive mandate in the Affordable Care Act — including the now-dismissed lawsuit launched by the University of Notre Dame.
Essentially, when the law states Catholic universities and the like must cover contraception, screw the law because MAYBE BABIES ARE PEOPLE TOO! But when the law gives a Catholic hospital an out regarding malpractice and the death of two unborn fetuses, suddenly real, potentially viable fetuses that may have been saved aren’t actually people.
Gotcha. The infallible doctrine of personhood exists when it’s legally expedient and can be jettisoned when it’s not. The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops states that the Catechism, “naturally contains the infallible doctrinal definitions of the popes and ecumenical councils in the history of the Church.”
Infallible, of course, until the super-duper CYA doctrine comes into play.
Ideally, decisions about abortion are made between two people who come to a consensus. However, in an ideal world, communism works. Until people who can get pregnant includes EVERYONE, individuals don’t get to force pregnancy upon their partners. Because that’s what I’m guessing the Jezebel commenter above is SO MADFACED about.
It’s important not to conflate men’s reproductive rights with pregnancy versus parenthood. While there’s a significant discussion to be had about men’s rights in regards to custody and visitation, it’s also important to remember a man’s right to parenthood (or to terminate parental rights/give the child up for adoption) begin once we’re talking about a living, breathing child — not a fetus in utero.
Also, while it may take two to traditionally tango, only one is pregnant. Let’s keep in mind that an abortion can take place even if the person seeking an abortion wants to be a parent one day — just not that day, for whatever reason. A man may want to be a father one day, too. But until he is able to undertake the physical and legal burden of fatherhood in the same way as motherhood, the person who is pregnant has the ultimate decision.