I was the most adamant pro-choicer for decades. Decades. And then they lost me when the fanatics decided a woman should have the right to abort the baby all the way up until the moment it literally comes out into the world. Utterly barbaric. I never dreamed I would join the pro-life side, but I have. If you have to wait until nine months to abort the baby, you are mentally ill and deserve to be charged with murder.
That said... let the states decide. Which is how it should have been handled in the first place.
Yep same for me. Almost identical to my beliefs about gay marriage and rights of that nature. Was on board and then it escalated and escalated and here we are.
I'm with you. I was the most adamant pro-choice person but not now. These people who actually CHEER abortion and have cakes and celebrations are downright evil.
I give a lot of credit for my political conversion to Rush Limbaugh. He showed up on a local San Francisco Radio Station in '83. (My epiphany came from elsewhere.)
Wow, this is amazing that so many people went from full pro-"choice" to pro-life. I pretty much did the same a few years ago when I realized that there was simply no moral way to win the pro-choice argument. Life begins at conception, and that's that. All the arguments about viability, etc. make no sense. How viable is a naturally-born infant? If you don't take care of him/her, then he/she dies. Not exactly independently viable.
All that said, I remain uncomfortably pro-choice up through the first trimester, though I realize it's a somewhat immoral position. In this sense, I agree with Alex. The best solution is the morning-after pill, taken literally within days.
And I don't believe the BS about women not knowing they are pregnant. Really? You had unprotected sex with a man and somehow didn't realize it?
I'm a gay guy who has avoided AIDS for 40 years. If I can manage that, women can manage to avoid unwanted pregnancy. And with AIDS, there's no post-hoc fix. Avoiding pregnancy is not rocket science.
I am someone like you. I can't understand why the pro choice people thought glorifying abortion was a good idea. It's hurt their cause tremendously. I remember when the pro choice zealots used to say that if men could get pregnant abortion would be a sacrament. That's what they seem to believe abortion is now.
Same here. Although I have never opposed gay marriage in the eyes of the state, and still don’t. I oppose child sexualization and allowing men to claim to “feel” like women to invade our private spaces and athletic competitions. I oppose child genital mutilation and sterilization.
I still lean slightly towards preferring early legal abortion. Two things make me realize I might still be wrong. One - the people who claimed “safe, rare, early” shifted quickly in my less than 4 decades on Earth to “babies kill the planet, so it’s fine kill fully developed viable babies, and if you have them anyway we’ll sexualize them in kindergarten.” Two - the body autonomy pushing more abortion decided that didn’t apply to experimental mRNA injections as they coerced 18 year olds to the THREE or get expelled from “higher education” even long after the leftist had plenty of evidence to demonstrate the stupid shots don’t prevent anyone from getting or spreading any disease, have a terrible short term side effect profile, are completely unnecessary for any healthy person under 50, at best might prevent severe disease for a few weeks, and come with unknowable long term consequences.
To lunatic leftists - killing another human is good, sexualizing a 5 year old is “social justice,” but rejecting an experimental heart attack shot is deserving of being “othered” and excluded from their society. I guess I am just realizing I don’t want to be on the lunatic leftist side of history.
Oh my goodness. This is EXACTLY me to the tee! I was so "whatever" until "whatever" was forced in my face and I GOT THEIR AGENDA. It's evil. You are spot on.
Exalting parental choice enables abortion based on disability or sex of the unborn. It also allows parents to use technologies like IVF and gamete shopping to create a genetically privileged class. This is already occurring and will intensify as genomic knowledge grows.
I hope and I also believe that Deus sive Natura (God or Nature) will indeed put an end to our sick, twisted, cruel, savage species. The sooner this happens the better.
The signs are pointing to self-extinction: non-reproductive relationships, the importance of Self over community and environment, avocado toast and other frivolous distractions. In nature, myxomatosis takes care of an over-populated rabbit warren, and deer produce less offspring when food is sparse (they have triplets the season after culling however). It is all self-correcting. Oh and let's not forget Russian TV showing how thermonuclear missiles into the Atlantic will wipe out the UK. We are in End Of Days.
Just to point out you realize you're part of the species also and all the people you love and care about are also part of it so you're actually rooting for their demise you may want to rethink your position there True there is a lot of savage things that happen but we're also overall a wonderfully good species that have done amazing things We've walked on the moon we've cured amazing diseases they've come so far and so many ways are art science literatureAll of these things are important and can't be swept under the rug
We killed (still do) folks not exactly like us. We have walked on the Moon 55 years ago......what did we gain? Cured amazing diseases....herbals already did that. Art/Science/Literature are only an echo of the reality du jour. We pollute, mismanage farming, mismanage global equity. Our species is in a delicate cycle. Just don't judge so quickly.
That's right. If you have the right to kill a unborn child for any reason, logic says that would include the right to tweak them in the womb genetically, legality notwithstanding. If they get something wrong, just do a 4th term abortion and start over. Life is cheap, so why not?
Sorry, I pressed the post button accidentally. What I meant to say was that I believe that Ralph Nader would confess that tendency to be an example of the “liberals dilemma.”
I finally became a paid subscriber just to be able to comment and agree with this post. I was also adamantly pro choice until the last few years when I realized how many lies I was led to believe. I’m glad to see there are a lot of us out there!
I was the same. Then came the "partial birth abortion" i.e. the child can actually live outside the womb but we're going to hack it to pieces and cut it's throat...well....makes me vomit.
If we are using a viability argument, how viable are infants, toddlers or even some adolescents outside the womb with zero support from adults and caregivers?
I think any viability arguments should be left to the states. There is no right to pulverize a human being, Constitutional or otherwise. It might be permitted by some states, or many. But there is no right.
Yep, viability is an invalid argument. Ever watch the reality show "Naked and Afraid?" How many of us if alone on this planet would manage to feed, clothe, and shelter ourselves?
The new law CA is passing to “protect abortion rights,” which are already “protected” up until birth, will now give mommy 28 days post-birth to make a final decision on if the baby should live or die. Not surprising. This is the state that wants to ban kids from attending school at private religious schools unless they get their useless heart attack jabs. It’s the state that allows planned parenthood to give cross sex hormones to 14 year olds without the parents’ consent, and if the parents find out and object, the state will take the kid and send them to indoctrination homes to ensure they get the genital mutilation surgeries and sterilization drugs the activists claim are moral.
There are already two women in prison pregnant at the hands of other “women” prisoners. No one seems to care at all if this was consensual.
CA in another 15-20 years is going to be nothing but addicted and/ or mentally ill and violent adults making up a majority of the population, with hyper sexualized damaged children a small minority in lots of cities there. Sad
In 1974 I ran for the Ga. House. Legalizing abortion came up and I said that in time they will be aborting girl babies because Momma wanted a boy first. I was ridiculed for such a stupid suggestion. "No doctor would ever do that!" Well they do. And sell their organs.
Unbelievable and no words for what kind of mother would do that or what kind of doctor would perform that procedure. What has this world come to?
I had 4 daughters and never knew or felt the need to know any of their sexes until they were born. I was never going for the boy either. Would love them regardless of their gender.
Many couples, in their dreaming of the good life, say to each other that they want a boy and a girl. The boy first. Before now they couldn't control that. Now they can.
I was pro choice until my Adopted daughter asked me how any of her friends could be pro-choice. Didn’t they realize that it was her life that could have been taken?, she asked.
Oops, I said. As I realized her question was applicable to me too.
I have been pro-life ever since and when we met her birth mother when she was 18, we both thanked her for giving her life.
..then there is Iceland where Down's children have disappeared. Despite its many failings, The Atlantic did run a rather thoughtful piece -- if you skipped the obligatory paragraph about non-binary people -- which ended up demonstrating how a pro-choice mindset really is about doing away with "less-than" children. It looked at European Countries that offer all sorts of "support and safety nets" for potential mothers to little avail.
I've always been pro-life but not adamantly so. What changed it for me and made me adamantly pro life was seeing pictures of premature babies. Most notable in my mind were pictures of triplets born at 24 weeks weighing about 1 pound each. They were tiny for sure, but all their parts were there: they were perfect little babies. In Canada, while in the womb, it is legal to kill these babies. Outside of the womb, every effort is made in neonatal ICU to save these babies.
There is no difference.
Having said this, we live in a very imperfect world. I would not make abortion illegal but put serious restrictions on it.
The Mississippi law at issue only restricts abortions. It bans abortions after 15 weeks but has exceptions for medical emergencies and fetal abnormalities. I find the outrage puzzling when considering laws in other Western countries. In Germany abortion is illegal but not punishable before 12 weeks. France bans abortions after 14 weeks. In Italy abortion is limited to the first trimester. In Ireland, its permitted during first 12 weeks. Sweden, the first 18 weeks....
I too was pro life until our daughter was born at 26 weeks weighing 1 lb 12 oz. Saw other babies born at 24 weeks. They are tiny, so tiny. But they are babies and there is no way around that.
When Roe was debated in the 1970s and decided by the Court, it was to be only in the FIRST tri-nester. And the baby was said to be just a blob of tissue.
Technology now shows us the truth, even as abortion is permitted until birth
Birth control is available so abortion shouldn’t be necessary except in rare cases.
Is Alex saying the lower income women are unable to cross state lines or to get a prescription. As far as I know, abortion isn’t free. So they too could look at their options, if they decide to kill their preborn baby
From what I can tell the abortion industry is targeted at poor Black women (as middle and upper class married women with children often demand it legality). I don’t think planned parenthood has strayed too far from its founder’s goal.....
Lovely Margaret Sangar wasn't nearly as bad as Alan Guttmacher, a former VP of the American Eugenics Society, who was concerned about rising population, yep, just like the WEF, Bill Gates et al., decided to push for unlimited abortion for population control. In 1966 he told the Post that governments may have to act officially to limit families reproductive rights. Sounds straight out of China. yikes
Black babies lives DO NOT MATTER! 1 out of every 3 black babies is aborted. Curious why 78% of Planned Parenthood clinics are in black or other minority communities.
My husband and I looked long and hard and finally found two different pro-life charities to support because we wanted to "put our money where our mouth is" so to speak. We support a local crisis pregnancy center and then a couple of homes in the NYC/NJ area called Good Counsel Homes. Amazing charity. Supports pregnant women by giving them a place to live, support in finding education/employment and childcare and allows them to stay for up to a year after giving birth. Can't say enough good about it.
I guess you're familiar with the AB2223 bill by now, which basically allows for a newborn (up to 28 days post birth) to lose its life and the mother won't be questioned or face charges? How exactly is that NOT murder? Where does it end? Young people need to be educated. Lines have to be drawn. Contraceptives are widely available. There's no excuse.
Margie, I think it is being proposed in California (of course - though I shouldn't talk because my state of NY lit up the NYC skyline in red on the day our legislature passed our abhorrent abortion bill).
Me, too, to everything you said. And I will capitalize this so everyone understands. OVERTURNING ROE V WADE DOES NOT BAN ABORTION. THE OVERTURN DOES NOT EVEN BAN PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION. THE RULING DOES NOT DECLARE ABORTION ILLEGAL. THE COURT MERELY LEAVES ABORTION LAW TO LEGISLATURES. PERIOD.
Some misunderstand. Most, I believe, are trying to spread fear by misstating (an understatement) the effect of the ruling. Never let a crisis (even a make-up one) go to waste.
Just the one aspect of "why and how" this original case was brought forth amazes me. Very few even understand how it went down and never should have been ruled on in the 1st place. It's that one aspect that MOST have no clue about
Couldn’t agree more. I too have been conflicted over when/if it should be allowed in cases of rape and/or incest. Same as with the health of the mother, BUT then what were legitimate questions didn’t matter anymore when they decided an inch wasn’t enough. They wanted not just a mile but basically let’s just legalize murder. Abortion is even ok AFTER a baby is born?! I wish we could go back to some common sense. Some compromise. Unfortunately, time after time, the left proves it has zero tolerance for anything but what they want. Not only that they constantly act in bad faith. We give an inch and we think both sides will be unhappy they turn around and make fools out of us! So, you begin to say NO! NONE! Not because we can’t compromise but because they always take the mile plus!
Well said, Margaret B. This is the Left's playbook. And we reasonable people have tried compromise, and have failed over and over. And now threatening violence to Supreme Court justices? The Left wants to silence all debate and dissent. And our President calls MAGA extremists?
Couldn’t agree with this more!! I was hanging on to pro choice mostly for cases of rape/incest until I started looking into how small those numbers (as a % of total abortions) and realized my thinking was very flawed on this. My pendulum has now swung the opposite way- to your point… no! None! No more.
Roe v Wade banned any state restriction on abortion in the first 3 months. Casey got us out of the meaningless trimester construct and allowed some limitations. This decision, if it comes to pass, will return the issue to the states and the politics of the states where the voice of the people will be heard through their elected representative. Just as Ruth Bader Ginsburg said should be the situation.
Be careful what you wish for and recall what we got with other votes like prohibition. To quote Mencken: Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.
Abortion will become so gruesome in the states that legalize it, that it will never leave the national conscience until it is outlawed altogether by federal law.
That's correct, and many states have already enacted their abortion legislation in anticipation of Roe's reversal. The only states impeded were those wanting more restrictions.
For the same reasons we don't authorize the choice to rob, murder or run red lights. Citizens do in fact get to make those choices, but the rest of us have a right to protect ourselves.
The court is going to hand it back to the states. It is a political issue. Even RBG had her doubts about Roe. Whatever abortion is it is a legal problem for the states to legislate. It is not a constitutional right.
It is the taking of a human life. The poor baby has no rights except by his mother who can choose to end his life. Abortion is a stain on this country and it should be illegal. 50 million babies have been killed. There is no way they are all the result of incest and rape....that's such a tired argument from those who are pro abortion.
The women I know who have chosen abortion have done so because it would have been inconvenient to have a child. My guess is that most of the 50 million+ babies killed by abortion were done for that reason- inconvenience to the mother.
And I'm really tired of hearing for "the health of the mother". Since when can a baby not be delievered safely today? And partial birth abortion? Really? There is no justification for dismembering a baby and then delivering him. I think we will be judged harshly for that one.
Abortion is anything but rare....and it does stop a beating heart. Any woman (and yes, I do mean a biological woman) knows early on that the life growing inside her is a living little person. You can hear a heartbeat at 6 weeks...I know because I had an internal ultrasound then and saw my child at 6 weeks. 6 weeks......life. Human life is worth saving. Period.
A good friend of mine is a high risk obstetrician who served low income mothers for many years. In her view, "the health of the mother" [meaning a physical threat] is almost never the case.
I don't understand thee argument about late term abortion being about the health of the mother. The baby may have to be delivered early for many reasons like pre-eclampsia but you don't have to kill it first. The abortion doesn't cause the baby to dissolve, it still has to be taken out/born 🤷♀️
For 40 years I believed exactly as you do. Then a few years ago, I saw a photo of an in uterine 6 week fetus. It was NOT a blob of tissue as I had always heard. Had I been lied to? I wanted to re-educate myself to better support my pro-choice position. Thanks to the internet, we have access to a whole world of knowledge. First, I watched an animated sketch video of each limb being removed from a fetus blindly by a doctor. Disturbing enough. Next I saw photos of preemies BORN during the stage when most abortions take place. Then I saw photos of actual aborted tiny humans and realized my own teen daughter had once been that size. It makes me vomit to even think of those dead children. After I learned what happens during a drug induced abortion, I can't believe that experience does not haunt every woman who has this week-long torture taking place inside her until her dead baby falls out into the toilet.
Please go look at these and take time to read and listen to interviews with women who have experienced these situations, including the women whose abortions FAILED forcing them to give birth to severely damaged living infants.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
Except for that pesky part at the beginning mentioning liberty for our “posterity.”
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
You misunderstand. Simulation Commander writes that abortion is essentially NOT mentioned in the Constitution, that vis-à-vis the 10th Amendment it should go back to the States. I argue that the Preamble protects the unborn and that the SCOTUS should retain the protection of the unborn as a constitutionally-protected right.
So I did misunderstand, but I think my point still stands. I don’t think the constitution addressed this. Though a human life technically begins at conception, so there is an argument there (as opposed to a particular life stage).
I think legally this needs to be returned to the states, and morally we need to change hearts and minds to appreciate human life from the beginning. I sit, very uncomfortably, supporting early choice over bans. I place bodily autonomy above right of another to live, though I also think abortion is murder. So I’m not sure. I do think our constitution was set up for state legislatures to make these hard decisions.
"I place bodily autonomy above right of another to live"
... of course this is why pregnancy is a unique condition. My female body is carrying Another Who is Not Me. It has a distinct DNA. The choice to abort is not simply about "my body." Each one of us come through this unique state of dependency which continues postpartum.
I have posed to my daughters this question: what is the youngest age a child can survive independently? Suppose they answer 5. I suggest to them, if a separate, but dependent human life can be ended in the womb, why not until the age of 5?
Unfortunately, not so simple as you end up with the State able to force a woman to carry an unwanted pregnancy to full term and give birth. I am not aghast at Court decision-maybe for the best, but nevertheless it’s a complex issue. I am pro choice (limited to first trimester). Old enough to remember illegal abortions. Relative died from one.
The wailing and gnashing of teeth over this by the people with no qualms pushing vaccines on everyone with a job (and more if they could get away with it) -it just blows my mind. Roe was always based on the thinnest of legal logic. The federal legislature should have codified Roe (or something like it).
What’s terrifying to me is that those same people think abortion is good and your boss or the state or whomever should have control over personal medical decisions. If this is left to the federal government at any level, what’s to stop them from mandating abortions? Or allowing employers to mandate abortions? Or limiting birth of white women for “equity” or all women for a “climate change emergency?”
Sorry, but the federal government needs to stay out of it. I’d rather my daughter have a child from an unwanted pregnancy than a forced abortion because the next Brandon calls “climate change” an “emergency” and requires them.
In the 1970s they could not get many legislative bodies or voters to vote for abortion, that's why it had to go to court. The left has been using the courts ever since. Same with gay rights. Every state that held an election voted down gay marriage. Only the SCOTUS would re-define marriage.
And in the most disgusting display of political theater EVER, the literal Democrats who had been fighting against gay marriage for decades took credit for the win.
Actually, many states were relaxing abortion laws in the 70s. RBG opined that this trend would have continued if not for Roe. Also, in the 70s illegal abortion atrocities and tragedies would have been common knowledge to most. One of my relatives died as a teenager from illegal abortion. Giving the State the ability to force a woman to carry unwanted pregnancy to term and give birth was rightly viewed at the time as deeply discriminatory if not barbaric. Hence, SC involvement.
There were not "many" states, only a handful that relaxed abortion law in the '60s and '70s.
Killing the unwanted is barbaric, not carrying a child.
The SCOTUS got involved because abortionists and eugenicists wanted population control. They paid a poor pregnant woman to sue Texas for the right to abort.
Did you know Jane Roe never had an abortion? She delivered a daughter. Her pregnancy was exploited for a test case. Roe v. Wade is a constitutional and moral fraud.
Legislation on this topic would be yet another overreach beyond the enumerated powers of the Constitution. But that hasn’t stopped them in 100 years or more…
Once again, the flip side of that is the State forcing a woman to carry an unwanted pregnancy to full term and give birth. Then prosecuting and jailing her for it. This is not acceptable to me or to majority of Americans. I am pro choice, but with limits.
To give another "flip-side" there are women who are expected to get abortions "to solve the problem" thus exacerbating male irresponsibility. I just think that abortion cannot be seen in isolation from a society's broader view of marriage & family structure as a foundation for stability. Look what we have now. It's a mess. Black marriage is rarer and rarer.
No laws historically or currently penalize or jail mothers, only abortionists. That pro-choicers need hysterics to promote abortion indicates abortion is not such a great thing. It is not the natural position of mothers to abort. If they had support, most would be happy to carry their child. Restricting abortion protects the majority of mothers from being coerced. Most abortng women say they have no "choice," because their parents, baby daddy, and friends influence the choice to abort.
Meanwhile, as one commentator has usefully pointed out, pro-lifers have had to live with it in a law-abiding fashion for 50 years regardless of our convictions. If the draft opinion is the substance of the ruling, pro-lifers will, by and large, will still be dealing with it. The other side probably does just want a "completely on demand" outcome which is just a non-starter on the national level. But they have had their way for a long time.
Right, therefore, murder should be legal. Serial killers are going to murder, more than once. They will find a way if they want to kill. Why bother having deterrents and making it more difficult for a repeat offense? Right?
Why criminalize control over reproduction? Other possibilities. Lots of people want to adopt but incentives and support has to be there for an unwanted pregnancy to be carried to term. All the energy that goes into “stopping” abortion could be put to much better.
Because, it's not criminalizing reproduction. That would be outlawing things like condoms and other contraceptive measures.
Reproduction is not illegal.
I could not disagree more. There is not even remotely enough energy put into stopping it. I think most people on here, including the author, agree that it is morally wrong and evil. When we are faced with evil we can either stand up against it, or we can say oh well not my problem. I refuse to do the latter.
The criminalization is not over reproduction, it is over the life that is being taken.
My mother is the best Catholic that I know. She thinks we all go to a better place. She had an unbelievably bad childhood, ten kids in the family, mostly different fathers and all ultimately taken away by the state and put in foster homes. Her opinion is that you don't want to be that unwanted hungry child who diapers are never changed. Better to graduate to a better place early
I’m so sorry for your mother’s experiences. I think many parents that cannot conceive would happily adopt the unwanted babies/children and that it would be a better option than killing the most precious and innocent.
No, life is better. No one should be put to death over dirty diapers. A lot of life is miserable. It's our job to relieve misery, not kill people for convenience. We can't claim to care about people if all we offer them is death. The people who do the killing will not go to "a better place," they will be more miserable here and in the hereafter.
There was a slogan, Every child a wanted child, and the theory that abortion saves an unwanted child from child abuse. But birth control and abortion are readily available and the crimes against children keep getting worse. Daily Mail has gruesome stories.
Exalting parental choice enables abortion based on disability or sex of the unborn. It also allows parents to use technologies like IVF and gamete shopping to create a genetically privileged class. This is already occurring and will intensify as genomic knowledge grows.
“Designer Babies.” I’ve seen ads in Yale and Stanford publications seeking to buy ovum (ripened eggs) from females fully enrolled at these Ivy League colleges. These young females must meet certain criteria (IQ, height, weight, eye and hair color, athleticism, evidence of “good” genes.) Big money is offered for this harvesting, $50-100,000, plus all medical expenses. I always wondered what these rich parents will do when generations of genes express a bit differently than predicted (surprise!), and their baby is born “other than what was ordered” and is “only” AVERAGE?
As you can imagine, this evil syndicate running the abortion clinic trafficking network has in place hundreds of ways of keeping this information about selling baby organs and body parts away from the public — and billions of $$$$ to do so. Do look up David Daleiden. That courageous reporter got sued in California for exposing some of this, and unfortunately it was in California, where the cabal reigns. They’re going after Daleiden with both barrels, tying him up in legal time-consuming knots, ruining him financially and professionally, and threatening years and years of prison. See: https://thomasmoresociety.org/client/david-daleiden/ 🙏
IVF embryos are genetically screened and the "best" ones are used. The rest are thrown away. It's been going on for decades. The only thing that's changing is the sophistication of the screening process.
Worrying about limited abortion "affecting poor people" is soft eugenics. It is a wish the poor and other undesirables would abort. The research of Planned Parenthood itself proves limited abortion CURBS unplanned pregnancy. Legal access to abortion AND contraception INCREASES unplanned pregnancies and abortions.
But if you follow the logic you yourself raised, the point of the law is to deter everyone--rich or poor. It shouldn't be a part of the issue to say, "Well, rich people will be less deterred by this law than poorer folks." It's rough to say but...so? The goal is deterrence of murder, not equitable distribution of difficulty in overcoming the deterrence.
Regardless of anyone's opinions on Roe vs. Wade, the bigger concerns here are a) the timing of this leaked (from February 2022) draft at 8pm last night, the protesters that had assembled in front of the Supreme Court with professional pro-choice signage by 10pm last night, b) the WSJ Op-Ed 6 days earlier that had brought up the idea of SC overturning Roe vs. Wade, and c) the purely coincidental scheduling of Kamela Harris at a pro-choice conference this evening. Because there are no other topics a VP cares more about in the run up to November. It's like somebody dumping a bucket of chum overboard and all the fishies come swimming up to gobble. No fishy asks where the chum might come from. But now Roe vs. Wade is the hot topic, the only topic, the finger on the scale, the most important issue, although yesterday it was on nobody's radar.
No mention of Ukraine, gas prices, food prices/shortages, inflation, recession, housing bubble, cost of living in the news today. New shiny object just bounced into the street.
Cleverly engineered to be US-centric, multi-generational, and no cost to be outraged! OTOH even cheap pork is more expensive than last week. Gas - literally choked upon filling the tank today. Chicken, veggies, all more $$$. But let's focus on Roe vs. Wade (delivered as Abortion Rights). This was fine for 50 years.....why now.
Not really. This leak (which I hope is a treasonable offense) has galvanized the Democrats to vote blue, because up to last night, many were not happy with Bidenomics and were planning to vote red. Now they have a reason to vote blue. The narrative has been manipulated, and folks are getting riled up over something written 3 months ago, which may not even happen. Classic example of a red herring.
The formula that works is: "I believe what I have been told to believe". The LGBTQ+ crowd and Hollywood have already been triggered to be outraged via MSM. This worked very well with Covid-shaming. Expect the Pro-Choice lawn signs and tee shirts through Summer. The fact Kamala was already scheduled to speak at a pro-choice conference tonight tells a lot about the planning already put into this "leak". I think they had to play this card as primaries are already starting today and polls showed the democrats have nothing to run on. So now the game changer. It was a dirty trick. This was a 3 month old draft with no real world relevance, now turned into a Cause. It is brilliantly disgustingly dishonest. Because that is where we are. Sad times.
I'm wondering who it will really motivate too. I mean, the Dems already have the demographic most concerned with the topic of abortion so what does this really get them politically? I guess it is useful as shiny object for the media to chase and parrot the approved Democrat line.
How about this....all the people screaming about the government not controlling their bodies when it came to abortion for the past 49 years, just came off of 2 years of screaming how they want the government to control their bodies. (See, it relates to COVID...feel better?)
I see a little difference between the defense of abortion and the historical defense of slavery. Democrats dehumanized slaves and babies by calling them “niggers” and “fetuses”. A woman’s “right to choose” is identical to the plantation owners right to control their “livestock and slaves”. They were all human then as today and Democrats hate those of us who defend those lives.
Yes, abortion is a tragedy. As a parent, I did have an abortion. I cried through the entire procedure and sometimes wonder "what if?" But at the time, it was my only option to save myself and my children from an abusive marriage. War is also murder, yet I don't see a lot of hand wringing about the war in Ukraine that the USA brought on and continues to fuel.
My heart goes out to you. Many of my friends suffered the same, for the same reasons, and while it's been 30+ years, they still cry, unwilling to forgive themselves. Your voice is very important to those faced with similar situations. Thank you for sharing, Barbara, and I pray that you have forgiven yourself.
Nope. It is murder. No justification given should be considered.
Should women have a choice? Sure. They could choose not to have sex - or they can choose a diaphragm, a pill, an IUD, or any other method of birth control. In the case of rape or abuse, more leeway should be given, although I have met and know of many adults who were products of these situations, some who were raised by their birth mother and others who were adopted. Even rape or abuse should not necessarily end in abortion. What more beautiful way to redeem evil for good??
And in all cases of abortion, does the baby get a choice??? I find it ridiculous how people scream pro-choice, while denying just that to the most vulnerable.
Leave it up to the states, and then if someone needs to travel across state lines, I suppose they’ll find a way.
The pro-abortion stance is the reason I cannot even contemplate voting for a Democrat. I cannot support anyone who believes that ending an innocent life is an acceptable response to dealing with the consequence of the behavior of two people who, in the VAST majority of cases, knew exactly what they were doing.
I was the most adamant pro-choicer for decades. Decades. And then they lost me when the fanatics decided a woman should have the right to abort the baby all the way up until the moment it literally comes out into the world. Utterly barbaric. I never dreamed I would join the pro-life side, but I have. If you have to wait until nine months to abort the baby, you are mentally ill and deserve to be charged with murder.
That said... let the states decide. Which is how it should have been handled in the first place.
Yep same for me. Almost identical to my beliefs about gay marriage and rights of that nature. Was on board and then it escalated and escalated and here we are.
If they lost someone like me, they've lost a huge swath. They just don't realize it.
I'm with you. I was the most adamant pro-choice person but not now. These people who actually CHEER abortion and have cakes and celebrations are downright evil.
I too, was pro-choice until I came to realize how Machiavellian the left is, and that includes anyone who gets in the way, including children.
I give a lot of credit for my political conversion to Rush Limbaugh. He showed up on a local San Francisco Radio Station in '83. (My epiphany came from elsewhere.)
I will remain pro-choice until the first trimester. But at the end of the day it is a democracy. Lets the States decide.
Wow, this is amazing that so many people went from full pro-"choice" to pro-life. I pretty much did the same a few years ago when I realized that there was simply no moral way to win the pro-choice argument. Life begins at conception, and that's that. All the arguments about viability, etc. make no sense. How viable is a naturally-born infant? If you don't take care of him/her, then he/she dies. Not exactly independently viable.
All that said, I remain uncomfortably pro-choice up through the first trimester, though I realize it's a somewhat immoral position. In this sense, I agree with Alex. The best solution is the morning-after pill, taken literally within days.
And I don't believe the BS about women not knowing they are pregnant. Really? You had unprotected sex with a man and somehow didn't realize it?
I'm a gay guy who has avoided AIDS for 40 years. If I can manage that, women can manage to avoid unwanted pregnancy. And with AIDS, there's no post-hoc fix. Avoiding pregnancy is not rocket science.
If you don’t want a child, there are many legitimate, painless ways to prevent pregnancy - abortion is not one of them!
I am someone like you. I can't understand why the pro choice people thought glorifying abortion was a good idea. It's hurt their cause tremendously. I remember when the pro choice zealots used to say that if men could get pregnant abortion would be a sacrament. That's what they seem to believe abortion is now.
Remember that old saying "If you're a conservative at 25 you have no heart, if you're a democrat at 45 you have no brain?"
I get it now.
Same here. Although I have never opposed gay marriage in the eyes of the state, and still don’t. I oppose child sexualization and allowing men to claim to “feel” like women to invade our private spaces and athletic competitions. I oppose child genital mutilation and sterilization.
I still lean slightly towards preferring early legal abortion. Two things make me realize I might still be wrong. One - the people who claimed “safe, rare, early” shifted quickly in my less than 4 decades on Earth to “babies kill the planet, so it’s fine kill fully developed viable babies, and if you have them anyway we’ll sexualize them in kindergarten.” Two - the body autonomy pushing more abortion decided that didn’t apply to experimental mRNA injections as they coerced 18 year olds to the THREE or get expelled from “higher education” even long after the leftist had plenty of evidence to demonstrate the stupid shots don’t prevent anyone from getting or spreading any disease, have a terrible short term side effect profile, are completely unnecessary for any healthy person under 50, at best might prevent severe disease for a few weeks, and come with unknowable long term consequences.
To lunatic leftists - killing another human is good, sexualizing a 5 year old is “social justice,” but rejecting an experimental heart attack shot is deserving of being “othered” and excluded from their society. I guess I am just realizing I don’t want to be on the lunatic leftist side of history.
Oh my goodness. This is EXACTLY me to the tee! I was so "whatever" until "whatever" was forced in my face and I GOT THEIR AGENDA. It's evil. You are spot on.
Exactly the same with me!
Same here!!
The devil always overplays his hand.
💯
Exalting parental choice enables abortion based on disability or sex of the unborn. It also allows parents to use technologies like IVF and gamete shopping to create a genetically privileged class. This is already occurring and will intensify as genomic knowledge grows.
This is extremely socially destructive.
Mark, at some point in time we have to believe that nature will either put an end to this or put an end to us as a result of this.
I hope and I also believe that Deus sive Natura (God or Nature) will indeed put an end to our sick, twisted, cruel, savage species. The sooner this happens the better.
The signs are pointing to self-extinction: non-reproductive relationships, the importance of Self over community and environment, avocado toast and other frivolous distractions. In nature, myxomatosis takes care of an over-populated rabbit warren, and deer produce less offspring when food is sparse (they have triplets the season after culling however). It is all self-correcting. Oh and let's not forget Russian TV showing how thermonuclear missiles into the Atlantic will wipe out the UK. We are in End Of Days.
Just to point out you realize you're part of the species also and all the people you love and care about are also part of it so you're actually rooting for their demise you may want to rethink your position there True there is a lot of savage things that happen but we're also overall a wonderfully good species that have done amazing things We've walked on the moon we've cured amazing diseases they've come so far and so many ways are art science literatureAll of these things are important and can't be swept under the rug
We killed (still do) folks not exactly like us. We have walked on the Moon 55 years ago......what did we gain? Cured amazing diseases....herbals already did that. Art/Science/Literature are only an echo of the reality du jour. We pollute, mismanage farming, mismanage global equity. Our species is in a delicate cycle. Just don't judge so quickly.
Leftist’s wild-eyed fantasy to end man caused climate change is coming sooner than they realize… along with the rest of their delusions
That's right. If you have the right to kill a unborn child for any reason, logic says that would include the right to tweak them in the womb genetically, legality notwithstanding. If they get something wrong, just do a 4th term abortion and start over. Life is cheap, so why not?
YES!!! I could NOT have been more "whatever" until the past few years and now??? I AM ACTUALLY WOKE. bigly.
Same exact experience for me. No more wishy washy “whatever” values for me.
I believed Ralph Nader would confess that
Sorry, I pressed the post button accidentally. What I meant to say was that I believe that Ralph Nader would confess that tendency to be an example of the “liberals dilemma.”
I finally became a paid subscriber just to be able to comment and agree with this post. I was also adamantly pro choice until the last few years when I realized how many lies I was led to believe. I’m glad to see there are a lot of us out there!
Welcome! It's terribly sad when people will fight like mad to save a dog from being killed, but then pay for someone to kill a baby.
Well, we should fight to save a dog too.
Absolutely
I was the same. Then came the "partial birth abortion" i.e. the child can actually live outside the womb but we're going to hack it to pieces and cut it's throat...well....makes me vomit.
And why stop then ; how about they allow the child to be killed up until 3 years of age. Murder is murder.
The left is full of hate, and murder is in their hearts. They have become more and more depraved. It's horrifying
If we are using a viability argument, how viable are infants, toddlers or even some adolescents outside the womb with zero support from adults and caregivers?
Heck, how viable is Brandon?
Good one😁
I think any viability arguments should be left to the states. There is no right to pulverize a human being, Constitutional or otherwise. It might be permitted by some states, or many. But there is no right.
Yep, viability is an invalid argument. Ever watch the reality show "Naked and Afraid?" How many of us if alone on this planet would manage to feed, clothe, and shelter ourselves?
They're pushing for that now in CA. It's not three years yet (just 28 days), but we're well on our way.
Excuse me?!
The new law CA is passing to “protect abortion rights,” which are already “protected” up until birth, will now give mommy 28 days post-birth to make a final decision on if the baby should live or die. Not surprising. This is the state that wants to ban kids from attending school at private religious schools unless they get their useless heart attack jabs. It’s the state that allows planned parenthood to give cross sex hormones to 14 year olds without the parents’ consent, and if the parents find out and object, the state will take the kid and send them to indoctrination homes to ensure they get the genital mutilation surgeries and sterilization drugs the activists claim are moral.
There are already two women in prison pregnant at the hands of other “women” prisoners. No one seems to care at all if this was consensual.
CA in another 15-20 years is going to be nothing but addicted and/ or mentally ill and violent adults making up a majority of the population, with hyper sexualized damaged children a small minority in lots of cities there. Sad
That's exactly where it's going. And that's where the euthanasia movement gets its impetus. Kill baby? Sure, then it's easy to kill some old geezer.
Right? The child really isn't that fun or engaging, or able to do much of anything for itself until 3 anyway. Ugh.
And also the sale of organs. Profitable, but disgusting. As someone said, "The NRA doesn't sell arms. Planned Parenthood does."
I think that’s why they’re pushing it so much. Organ harvesting. It’s beyond anything I could ever have imagined humans would do.
In 1974 I ran for the Ga. House. Legalizing abortion came up and I said that in time they will be aborting girl babies because Momma wanted a boy first. I was ridiculed for such a stupid suggestion. "No doctor would ever do that!" Well they do. And sell their organs.
Unbelievable and no words for what kind of mother would do that or what kind of doctor would perform that procedure. What has this world come to?
I had 4 daughters and never knew or felt the need to know any of their sexes until they were born. I was never going for the boy either. Would love them regardless of their gender.
Many couples, in their dreaming of the good life, say to each other that they want a boy and a girl. The boy first. Before now they couldn't control that. Now they can.
Exactly. I believe the CCP sells them too, from Uyghers.
I became pro-lifer when I realized that my grand child could be killed without my knowledge. Very sobering.
I was pro choice until my Adopted daughter asked me how any of her friends could be pro-choice. Didn’t they realize that it was her life that could have been taken?, she asked.
Oops, I said. As I realized her question was applicable to me too.
I have been pro-life ever since and when we met her birth mother when she was 18, we both thanked her for giving her life.
There are couples waiting to adopt unwanted child
There is a waiting list of parents willing to adopt a child with Down's syndrome.
..then there is Iceland where Down's children have disappeared. Despite its many failings, The Atlantic did run a rather thoughtful piece -- if you skipped the obligatory paragraph about non-binary people -- which ended up demonstrating how a pro-choice mindset really is about doing away with "less-than" children. It looked at European Countries that offer all sorts of "support and safety nets" for potential mothers to little avail.
I was pro-choice until I saw pictures of aborted babies. Doesn't matter the gestational age - they are all very sobering. Never looked back.
And out of the mouths of babes, Margie. What an amazing encounter with your daughter.
And after mentioning it to a friend, I was asked to tell my story to the 2000+ people at our church... I realized it was a story to tell...
And look what G-d did with that story! Amazing.
And my only chance at being a grandmother was aborted. I didn’t even know until years later. Sad.
I am SOOOO sorry!!!
Thank you. I’m more sad for my daughter. 😔
I’m so sorry, for you. My 7 are my gems
I can only imagine. 💜
wow. yes.
I've always been pro-life but not adamantly so. What changed it for me and made me adamantly pro life was seeing pictures of premature babies. Most notable in my mind were pictures of triplets born at 24 weeks weighing about 1 pound each. They were tiny for sure, but all their parts were there: they were perfect little babies. In Canada, while in the womb, it is legal to kill these babies. Outside of the womb, every effort is made in neonatal ICU to save these babies.
There is no difference.
Having said this, we live in a very imperfect world. I would not make abortion illegal but put serious restrictions on it.
The Mississippi law at issue only restricts abortions. It bans abortions after 15 weeks but has exceptions for medical emergencies and fetal abnormalities. I find the outrage puzzling when considering laws in other Western countries. In Germany abortion is illegal but not punishable before 12 weeks. France bans abortions after 14 weeks. In Italy abortion is limited to the first trimester. In Ireland, its permitted during first 12 weeks. Sweden, the first 18 weeks....
There is not a stage of human development where a human is not a human.
Great comment. Yes, I tell people all the time that our abortion laws are more closely aligned with China and North Korea.
I suspect most Americans simply *assume* that Europeans have "liberal abortion laws"
Mississippis law sounds reasonable to me and I am pro choice. Over 90% of pregnancies in US are terminated in first trimester-well under 15 weeks.
I too was pro life until our daughter was born at 26 weeks weighing 1 lb 12 oz. Saw other babies born at 24 weeks. They are tiny, so tiny. But they are babies and there is no way around that.
I don’t get it. You were pro-life until your daughter was born? I’m hoping this is a typo
You mean pro Choi e?
Glenn Greenwald wrote as eloquently and concisely as ever on this today:
https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-irrational-misguided-discourse?r=4z7m3&s=r&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email
When Roe was debated in the 1970s and decided by the Court, it was to be only in the FIRST tri-nester. And the baby was said to be just a blob of tissue.
Technology now shows us the truth, even as abortion is permitted until birth
Birth control is available so abortion shouldn’t be necessary except in rare cases.
Is Alex saying the lower income women are unable to cross state lines or to get a prescription. As far as I know, abortion isn’t free. So they too could look at their options, if they decide to kill their preborn baby
From what I can tell the abortion industry is targeted at poor Black women (as middle and upper class married women with children often demand it legality). I don’t think planned parenthood has strayed too far from its founder’s goal.....
I have never seen a PP office in an affluent neighborhood
Me neither.
Lovely Margaret Sangar wasn't nearly as bad as Alan Guttmacher, a former VP of the American Eugenics Society, who was concerned about rising population, yep, just like the WEF, Bill Gates et al., decided to push for unlimited abortion for population control. In 1966 he told the Post that governments may have to act officially to limit families reproductive rights. Sounds straight out of China. yikes
And there always seems to be money to "help" low-income/no income/underprivileged people.
It's incredibly cynical to say--as I do--that the US has the richest poor people in the world.
So, so spare me the claims that poor women will be unable to obtain "abortion services."
Besides, I know too many people who seek abortions to shirk responsibility.
Most aborted babies are Black. The left tries to hide its eugenics, but it is there.
I thought Black lives matter.
Maybe it's just SOME Black lives that matter.
Black babies lives DO NOT MATTER! 1 out of every 3 black babies is aborted. Curious why 78% of Planned Parenthood clinics are in black or other minority communities.
You noticed that, too?
My husband and I looked long and hard and finally found two different pro-life charities to support because we wanted to "put our money where our mouth is" so to speak. We support a local crisis pregnancy center and then a couple of homes in the NYC/NJ area called Good Counsel Homes. Amazing charity. Supports pregnant women by giving them a place to live, support in finding education/employment and childcare and allows them to stay for up to a year after giving birth. Can't say enough good about it.
I guess you're familiar with the AB2223 bill by now, which basically allows for a newborn (up to 28 days post birth) to lose its life and the mother won't be questioned or face charges? How exactly is that NOT murder? Where does it end? Young people need to be educated. Lines have to be drawn. Contraceptives are widely available. There's no excuse.
That is completely abhorrent and criminal and must be strongly opposed.
Where is that law in effect?
That’s shocking
Margie, I think it is being proposed in California (of course - though I shouldn't talk because my state of NY lit up the NYC skyline in red on the day our legislature passed our abhorrent abortion bill).
CA of course.
Bill AB2223 in California (so it shouldn't be too shocking).
For me, it was seeing my older son for the first time in utero through an ultrasound. It was no longer an abstract concept.
So many of US have similar sentiments on the issue...well said!
Agree. Let's just vote on it, enough with the courts.
How many mules would add to the votes for that?
Me, too, to everything you said. And I will capitalize this so everyone understands. OVERTURNING ROE V WADE DOES NOT BAN ABORTION. THE OVERTURN DOES NOT EVEN BAN PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION. THE RULING DOES NOT DECLARE ABORTION ILLEGAL. THE COURT MERELY LEAVES ABORTION LAW TO LEGISLATURES. PERIOD.
The sheer misunderstanding by so many on this issue in reality is amazing.
Some misunderstand. Most, I believe, are trying to spread fear by misstating (an understatement) the effect of the ruling. Never let a crisis (even a make-up one) go to waste.
I agree totally though about the "never letting a crisis" lever the commicRATs use at every turn or availability
Just the one aspect of "why and how" this original case was brought forth amazes me. Very few even understand how it went down and never should have been ruled on in the 1st place. It's that one aspect that MOST have no clue about
The more ghoulish the left got about this, the more people they pushed to just want to get rid of abortion or let states decide.
Couldn’t agree more. I too have been conflicted over when/if it should be allowed in cases of rape and/or incest. Same as with the health of the mother, BUT then what were legitimate questions didn’t matter anymore when they decided an inch wasn’t enough. They wanted not just a mile but basically let’s just legalize murder. Abortion is even ok AFTER a baby is born?! I wish we could go back to some common sense. Some compromise. Unfortunately, time after time, the left proves it has zero tolerance for anything but what they want. Not only that they constantly act in bad faith. We give an inch and we think both sides will be unhappy they turn around and make fools out of us! So, you begin to say NO! NONE! Not because we can’t compromise but because they always take the mile plus!
Well said, Margaret B. This is the Left's playbook. And we reasonable people have tried compromise, and have failed over and over. And now threatening violence to Supreme Court justices? The Left wants to silence all debate and dissent. And our President calls MAGA extremists?
Couldn’t agree with this more!! I was hanging on to pro choice mostly for cases of rape/incest until I started looking into how small those numbers (as a % of total abortions) and realized my thinking was very flawed on this. My pendulum has now swung the opposite way- to your point… no! None! No more.
Alex lost me at "banning". Is that what overturning Roe vs Wade is?
Roe v Wade banned any state restriction on abortion in the first 3 months. Casey got us out of the meaningless trimester construct and allowed some limitations. This decision, if it comes to pass, will return the issue to the states and the politics of the states where the voice of the people will be heard through their elected representative. Just as Ruth Bader Ginsburg said should be the situation.
If this is in fact true, all it does is allow individual states to decide, which is very Constitutional.
Agree, and taking the issue out of presidential politics will be a relief.
The votes of Americans CITIZENS would actually count for something. What a novel idea.
Be careful what you wish for and recall what we got with other votes like prohibition. To quote Mencken: Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.
Mencken said that about voting for crooked politicians, not about protecting mothers and babies.
Killing is a strange way to protect mothers and babies.
I trust the average voter much more than professional politicians & agenda driven jurists.
Abortion will become so gruesome in the states that legalize it, that it will never leave the national conscience until it is outlawed altogether by federal law.
Exactly!
That's correct, and many states have already enacted their abortion legislation in anticipation of Roe's reversal. The only states impeded were those wanting more restrictions.
But why should the state get to decide? Let the citizen decide.
They will by voting.
For the same reasons we don't authorize the choice to rob, murder or run red lights. Citizens do in fact get to make those choices, but the rest of us have a right to protect ourselves.
It's the woman's body, no one else.
It's the baby's body.
But there’s no baby and no body.
I bet you are glad your mother didn’t think that way.
I think the child in the womb might disagree.
I don’t.
Constitutional would let the person decide.
Under the laws of the state in which you reside.That’s the way it is,Patrick.Deal with it.Want me to call you a wambulance?
The court is going to hand it back to the states. It is a political issue. Even RBG had her doubts about Roe. Whatever abortion is it is a legal problem for the states to legislate. It is not a constitutional right.
I could not have said it better.
So much common sense being emitted here…
Right to privacy is very defensible under the bill of rights. People should be in control of their own bodies. Pretty fundamental.
Yep. And those unborn babies have their own bodies, too.
Yay, I'm all for self control.
It is the taking of a human life. The poor baby has no rights except by his mother who can choose to end his life. Abortion is a stain on this country and it should be illegal. 50 million babies have been killed. There is no way they are all the result of incest and rape....that's such a tired argument from those who are pro abortion.
The women I know who have chosen abortion have done so because it would have been inconvenient to have a child. My guess is that most of the 50 million+ babies killed by abortion were done for that reason- inconvenience to the mother.
And I'm really tired of hearing for "the health of the mother". Since when can a baby not be delievered safely today? And partial birth abortion? Really? There is no justification for dismembering a baby and then delivering him. I think we will be judged harshly for that one.
Abortion is anything but rare....and it does stop a beating heart. Any woman (and yes, I do mean a biological woman) knows early on that the life growing inside her is a living little person. You can hear a heartbeat at 6 weeks...I know because I had an internal ultrasound then and saw my child at 6 weeks. 6 weeks......life. Human life is worth saving. Period.
Agreed 1000000%
Thank you, very well stated.
Guttmacher, the research arm of PP, admits that the vast majority of abortions are done for convenience.
A good friend of mine is a high risk obstetrician who served low income mothers for many years. In her view, "the health of the mother" [meaning a physical threat] is almost never the case.
I don't understand thee argument about late term abortion being about the health of the mother. The baby may have to be delivered early for many reasons like pre-eclampsia but you don't have to kill it first. The abortion doesn't cause the baby to dissolve, it still has to be taken out/born 🤷♀️
In your opinion. Others feel differently. Let others control their own bodies.
There's another body involved, the unborn child, who also has rights.
Exactly. The baby is always forgotten by those who favor “my body my choice”.
Not a body.
Not a body? Wow, I'm sincerely sorry for whatever happened to put you in denial.
No denial. Don't be sorry. We have different opinions. But I don't wish to enforce my opinion on you.
For 40 years I believed exactly as you do. Then a few years ago, I saw a photo of an in uterine 6 week fetus. It was NOT a blob of tissue as I had always heard. Had I been lied to? I wanted to re-educate myself to better support my pro-choice position. Thanks to the internet, we have access to a whole world of knowledge. First, I watched an animated sketch video of each limb being removed from a fetus blindly by a doctor. Disturbing enough. Next I saw photos of preemies BORN during the stage when most abortions take place. Then I saw photos of actual aborted tiny humans and realized my own teen daughter had once been that size. It makes me vomit to even think of those dead children. After I learned what happens during a drug induced abortion, I can't believe that experience does not haunt every woman who has this week-long torture taking place inside her until her dead baby falls out into the toilet.
Please go look at these and take time to read and listen to interviews with women who have experienced these situations, including the women whose abortions FAILED forcing them to give birth to severely damaged living infants.
Here's where the Constitution mentions abortion:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
This is a state matter.
Except for that pesky part at the beginning mentioning liberty for our “posterity.”
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
https://youtu.be/OqvLi7qZ_yU
So killing another human is part of “posterity”? Sorry, I disagree. How does “posterity” somehow grant a right to take a human life?
You misunderstand. Simulation Commander writes that abortion is essentially NOT mentioned in the Constitution, that vis-à-vis the 10th Amendment it should go back to the States. I argue that the Preamble protects the unborn and that the SCOTUS should retain the protection of the unborn as a constitutionally-protected right.
So I did misunderstand, but I think my point still stands. I don’t think the constitution addressed this. Though a human life technically begins at conception, so there is an argument there (as opposed to a particular life stage).
I think legally this needs to be returned to the states, and morally we need to change hearts and minds to appreciate human life from the beginning. I sit, very uncomfortably, supporting early choice over bans. I place bodily autonomy above right of another to live, though I also think abortion is murder. So I’m not sure. I do think our constitution was set up for state legislatures to make these hard decisions.
"I place bodily autonomy above right of another to live"
... of course this is why pregnancy is a unique condition. My female body is carrying Another Who is Not Me. It has a distinct DNA. The choice to abort is not simply about "my body." Each one of us come through this unique state of dependency which continues postpartum.
I have posed to my daughters this question: what is the youngest age a child can survive independently? Suppose they answer 5. I suggest to them, if a separate, but dependent human life can be ended in the womb, why not until the age of 5?
Except states cannot violate my basic rights. Which would certainly include what I do to my own body.
Unfortunately the states see it differently. How long have we been waging the war on drugs?
Unfortunately, not so simple as you end up with the State able to force a woman to carry an unwanted pregnancy to full term and give birth. I am not aghast at Court decision-maybe for the best, but nevertheless it’s a complex issue. I am pro choice (limited to first trimester). Old enough to remember illegal abortions. Relative died from one.
I am sorry about your relative, Nancy. Truly.
Thank you. Mothers cousin, back in the 30s. Sadly, not an uncommon story.
You probably also know a lot of people who have died from abortion - you just never knew you knew them.
The wailing and gnashing of teeth over this by the people with no qualms pushing vaccines on everyone with a job (and more if they could get away with it) -it just blows my mind. Roe was always based on the thinnest of legal logic. The federal legislature should have codified Roe (or something like it).
Yes it's much harder to be sympathetic to the people who just said I should be driven out of society for not getting a jab I don't need.
What’s terrifying to me is that those same people think abortion is good and your boss or the state or whomever should have control over personal medical decisions. If this is left to the federal government at any level, what’s to stop them from mandating abortions? Or allowing employers to mandate abortions? Or limiting birth of white women for “equity” or all women for a “climate change emergency?”
Sorry, but the federal government needs to stay out of it. I’d rather my daughter have a child from an unwanted pregnancy than a forced abortion because the next Brandon calls “climate change” an “emergency” and requires them.
In the 1970s they could not get many legislative bodies or voters to vote for abortion, that's why it had to go to court. The left has been using the courts ever since. Same with gay rights. Every state that held an election voted down gay marriage. Only the SCOTUS would re-define marriage.
And in the most disgusting display of political theater EVER, the literal Democrats who had been fighting against gay marriage for decades took credit for the win.
Actually, many states were relaxing abortion laws in the 70s. RBG opined that this trend would have continued if not for Roe. Also, in the 70s illegal abortion atrocities and tragedies would have been common knowledge to most. One of my relatives died as a teenager from illegal abortion. Giving the State the ability to force a woman to carry unwanted pregnancy to term and give birth was rightly viewed at the time as deeply discriminatory if not barbaric. Hence, SC involvement.
There were not "many" states, only a handful that relaxed abortion law in the '60s and '70s.
Killing the unwanted is barbaric, not carrying a child.
The SCOTUS got involved because abortionists and eugenicists wanted population control. They paid a poor pregnant woman to sue Texas for the right to abort.
Did you know Jane Roe never had an abortion? She delivered a daughter. Her pregnancy was exploited for a test case. Roe v. Wade is a constitutional and moral fraud.
Legislation on this topic would be yet another overreach beyond the enumerated powers of the Constitution. But that hasn’t stopped them in 100 years or more…
Protecting life is the first duty of a civil government. If the state can regulate surgeons, it can regulate procedures.
Once again, the flip side of that is the State forcing a woman to carry an unwanted pregnancy to full term and give birth. Then prosecuting and jailing her for it. This is not acceptable to me or to majority of Americans. I am pro choice, but with limits.
To give another "flip-side" there are women who are expected to get abortions "to solve the problem" thus exacerbating male irresponsibility. I just think that abortion cannot be seen in isolation from a society's broader view of marriage & family structure as a foundation for stability. Look what we have now. It's a mess. Black marriage is rarer and rarer.
No laws historically or currently penalize or jail mothers, only abortionists. That pro-choicers need hysterics to promote abortion indicates abortion is not such a great thing. It is not the natural position of mothers to abort. If they had support, most would be happy to carry their child. Restricting abortion protects the majority of mothers from being coerced. Most abortng women say they have no "choice," because their parents, baby daddy, and friends influence the choice to abort.
I don’t disagree.
Meanwhile, as one commentator has usefully pointed out, pro-lifers have had to live with it in a law-abiding fashion for 50 years regardless of our convictions. If the draft opinion is the substance of the ruling, pro-lifers will, by and large, will still be dealing with it. The other side probably does just want a "completely on demand" outcome which is just a non-starter on the national level. But they have had their way for a long time.
Right, therefore, murder should be legal. Serial killers are going to murder, more than once. They will find a way if they want to kill. Why bother having deterrents and making it more difficult for a repeat offense? Right?
Why criminalize control over reproduction? Other possibilities. Lots of people want to adopt but incentives and support has to be there for an unwanted pregnancy to be carried to term. All the energy that goes into “stopping” abortion could be put to much better.
Because, it's not criminalizing reproduction. That would be outlawing things like condoms and other contraceptive measures.
Reproduction is not illegal.
I could not disagree more. There is not even remotely enough energy put into stopping it. I think most people on here, including the author, agree that it is morally wrong and evil. When we are faced with evil we can either stand up against it, or we can say oh well not my problem. I refuse to do the latter.
The criminalization is not over reproduction, it is over the life that is being taken.
I don’t think abortion is evil. So we’re going to have to agree to disagree.
Do you think an adult murdering a 5 year old is evil?
Hearing crickets from Grape Soda…
He ran out of fizz
I’m not going to participate in this conversation. Sorry.
I'm sorry that people are spineless.
Oh okay. So you reply to my comment then tap out when the going gets tough, got it.
Convenient.
My mother is the best Catholic that I know. She thinks we all go to a better place. She had an unbelievably bad childhood, ten kids in the family, mostly different fathers and all ultimately taken away by the state and put in foster homes. Her opinion is that you don't want to be that unwanted hungry child who diapers are never changed. Better to graduate to a better place early
I’m so sorry for your mother’s experiences. I think many parents that cannot conceive would happily adopt the unwanted babies/children and that it would be a better option than killing the most precious and innocent.
We have no authority to condemn a life because we judge the circumstances unfavorable - where is the hope in that?
No, life is better. No one should be put to death over dirty diapers. A lot of life is miserable. It's our job to relieve misery, not kill people for convenience. We can't claim to care about people if all we offer them is death. The people who do the killing will not go to "a better place," they will be more miserable here and in the hereafter.
There was a slogan, Every child a wanted child, and the theory that abortion saves an unwanted child from child abuse. But birth control and abortion are readily available and the crimes against children keep getting worse. Daily Mail has gruesome stories.
Adoption is over regulated and overly bureaucratic, otherwise there would be more adoption. Sadly, abuse persists there as well
Exalting parental choice enables abortion based on disability or sex of the unborn. It also allows parents to use technologies like IVF and gamete shopping to create a genetically privileged class. This is already occurring and will intensify as genomic knowledge grows.
This is extremely socially destructive.
“Designer Babies.” I’ve seen ads in Yale and Stanford publications seeking to buy ovum (ripened eggs) from females fully enrolled at these Ivy League colleges. These young females must meet certain criteria (IQ, height, weight, eye and hair color, athleticism, evidence of “good” genes.) Big money is offered for this harvesting, $50-100,000, plus all medical expenses. I always wondered what these rich parents will do when generations of genes express a bit differently than predicted (surprise!), and their baby is born “other than what was ordered” and is “only” AVERAGE?
This is horrifying. I had no idea this was taking place. This is not humane or natural.
As you can imagine, this evil syndicate running the abortion clinic trafficking network has in place hundreds of ways of keeping this information about selling baby organs and body parts away from the public — and billions of $$$$ to do so. Do look up David Daleiden. That courageous reporter got sued in California for exposing some of this, and unfortunately it was in California, where the cabal reigns. They’re going after Daleiden with both barrels, tying him up in legal time-consuming knots, ruining him financially and professionally, and threatening years and years of prison. See: https://thomasmoresociety.org/client/david-daleiden/ 🙏
IVF embryos are genetically screened and the "best" ones are used. The rest are thrown away. It's been going on for decades. The only thing that's changing is the sophistication of the screening process.
IVF is high tech eugenics.
Worrying about limited abortion "affecting poor people" is soft eugenics. It is a wish the poor and other undesirables would abort. The research of Planned Parenthood itself proves limited abortion CURBS unplanned pregnancy. Legal access to abortion AND contraception INCREASES unplanned pregnancies and abortions.
But if you follow the logic you yourself raised, the point of the law is to deter everyone--rich or poor. It shouldn't be a part of the issue to say, "Well, rich people will be less deterred by this law than poorer folks." It's rough to say but...so? The goal is deterrence of murder, not equitable distribution of difficulty in overcoming the deterrence.
Regardless of anyone's opinions on Roe vs. Wade, the bigger concerns here are a) the timing of this leaked (from February 2022) draft at 8pm last night, the protesters that had assembled in front of the Supreme Court with professional pro-choice signage by 10pm last night, b) the WSJ Op-Ed 6 days earlier that had brought up the idea of SC overturning Roe vs. Wade, and c) the purely coincidental scheduling of Kamela Harris at a pro-choice conference this evening. Because there are no other topics a VP cares more about in the run up to November. It's like somebody dumping a bucket of chum overboard and all the fishies come swimming up to gobble. No fishy asks where the chum might come from. But now Roe vs. Wade is the hot topic, the only topic, the finger on the scale, the most important issue, although yesterday it was on nobody's radar.
The new distraction of the Covid disaster. How convenient the timing is.
Because climate change just wasn't working as hoped.....
Happy to see a few people who “get it”!
No mention of Ukraine, gas prices, food prices/shortages, inflation, recession, housing bubble, cost of living in the news today. New shiny object just bounced into the street.
“Look beneath …” “Let’s think this through …” “Things are not always what they seem to be …”
Neither was Ukraine
Or "It's Putin's fault"
Sorry, Ukraine, you are so "yesterday."
Cleverly engineered to be US-centric, multi-generational, and no cost to be outraged! OTOH even cheap pork is more expensive than last week. Gas - literally choked upon filling the tank today. Chicken, veggies, all more $$$. But let's focus on Roe vs. Wade (delivered as Abortion Rights). This was fine for 50 years.....why now.
Distraction from the 2000 Mules release
Not really. This leak (which I hope is a treasonable offense) has galvanized the Democrats to vote blue, because up to last night, many were not happy with Bidenomics and were planning to vote red. Now they have a reason to vote blue. The narrative has been manipulated, and folks are getting riled up over something written 3 months ago, which may not even happen. Classic example of a red herring.
it will be interesting to see how much the average democrat voter truly cares about abortion. most in blue states will see no effect.
my guess is that this topic will lose steam far before november, but i could be mistaken
The formula that works is: "I believe what I have been told to believe". The LGBTQ+ crowd and Hollywood have already been triggered to be outraged via MSM. This worked very well with Covid-shaming. Expect the Pro-Choice lawn signs and tee shirts through Summer. The fact Kamala was already scheduled to speak at a pro-choice conference tonight tells a lot about the planning already put into this "leak". I think they had to play this card as primaries are already starting today and polls showed the democrats have nothing to run on. So now the game changer. It was a dirty trick. This was a 3 month old draft with no real world relevance, now turned into a Cause. It is brilliantly disgustingly dishonest. Because that is where we are. Sad times.
So much for Team Reality....
I'm wondering who it will really motivate too. I mean, the Dems already have the demographic most concerned with the topic of abortion so what does this really get them politically? I guess it is useful as shiny object for the media to chase and parrot the approved Democrat line.
Yes bingo you win the chocolate factory.
Kamala in Righteous Gear tonight. How dare they. How did she have an inside scoop on the pulse du jour. Does anyone else see the problem here?
or blue herring, as the case may be
I'm just here for the COVID stuff. Good luck on the lawsuit. Big supporter.
Social opinions? Pass
How about this....all the people screaming about the government not controlling their bodies when it came to abortion for the past 49 years, just came off of 2 years of screaming how they want the government to control their bodies. (See, it relates to COVID...feel better?)
you chickenshit - truth is unitary - the Covid stuff wasn't social ?
BAM!
Hard pass.
Agreed. Esp since when it comes to views from journalists, I'm much more interested in why it was "leaked" & how, for example.
Bari Weiss did a great dive today.
Thanks for letting us know
Lol
No. A little murder is not ok.
I see a little difference between the defense of abortion and the historical defense of slavery. Democrats dehumanized slaves and babies by calling them “niggers” and “fetuses”. A woman’s “right to choose” is identical to the plantation owners right to control their “livestock and slaves”. They were all human then as today and Democrats hate those of us who defend those lives.
💯
Yes, abortion is a tragedy. As a parent, I did have an abortion. I cried through the entire procedure and sometimes wonder "what if?" But at the time, it was my only option to save myself and my children from an abusive marriage. War is also murder, yet I don't see a lot of hand wringing about the war in Ukraine that the USA brought on and continues to fuel.
My heart goes out to you. Many of my friends suffered the same, for the same reasons, and while it's been 30+ years, they still cry, unwilling to forgive themselves. Your voice is very important to those faced with similar situations. Thank you for sharing, Barbara, and I pray that you have forgiven yourself.
Not sure the USA brought on that war. Pretty sure Putin did that alone.
Biden and his puppet master completely orchestrated that entire thing - come on. 🤦🏼♀️
Explain how please.
It’s isn’t about banning it. It should be the states’ decision, which 30 already allow.
Nope. It is murder. No justification given should be considered.
Should women have a choice? Sure. They could choose not to have sex - or they can choose a diaphragm, a pill, an IUD, or any other method of birth control. In the case of rape or abuse, more leeway should be given, although I have met and know of many adults who were products of these situations, some who were raised by their birth mother and others who were adopted. Even rape or abuse should not necessarily end in abortion. What more beautiful way to redeem evil for good??
And in all cases of abortion, does the baby get a choice??? I find it ridiculous how people scream pro-choice, while denying just that to the most vulnerable.
Leave it up to the states, and then if someone needs to travel across state lines, I suppose they’ll find a way.
You can take the guy out of the NYT but you can’t take the NYT out of the guy.
Uncalled for.
The pro-abortion stance is the reason I cannot even contemplate voting for a Democrat. I cannot support anyone who believes that ending an innocent life is an acceptable response to dealing with the consequence of the behavior of two people who, in the VAST majority of cases, knew exactly what they were doing.