Mommy, is it safe to come out of the womb?

I see you don't actually condemn the person who advocates these things yet you are quick to condemn a woman for the choices she makes.

Tell me who else would making abortion illegal effect if not only women, and pregnant women at that.

The pro-life agenda is targeting women, it is no different to targeting homosexuals, ethnic minorities or the disabled, the only thing that makes it seem respectful to do so is the inclusion of a pregnancy.
You only have to look through the comments in this very forum to see that many, if not all, pro-lifers play the blame game with comments such as "she should keep her legs closed", "its her own fault for having sex" or "its obvious she has no morals". Pro-lifers may not hate women in general, but they do hate the fact that women want to enjoy non-marital sex without getting pregnant .. in general they hate that women have the freedom to decide what is right for them.

 

Great link:

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/twenty-weeks-pregnant-with-twins-but-last-week-she-had-an-abortion/

 

Great yet another religiously motivated article .. and pro-lifers keep saying it's pro-choicers who continually bring religion into the debates.

Chuck in a little Godwin's law as well

Mix in a little emotional appeal

Result = A perfect "not meaning anything" article.

PS : 20 weeks is not a late-term abortion and is perfectly legal. - "A late-term abortion often refers to an induced abortion procedure that occurs after the 20th week of gestation."

 

Look at this, a group of pro-lifers trying to block a pregnant woman from going into an abortion clinic in Mississippi

Just look how pregnant she is! just awful

 

LOL! Which woman are you talking about and how would you know how pregnant any of them are???
If the Anti-Choicers are blocking anyone from going about their lawful business then they should be arrested.

 

Can't answer? Why not?

 

Well, that's just totally not true. Most pro lifers care about making laws that protect the innocent (well, but also unborn) human life, and well then, it just so happens that females are the sex which carries the young offspring in almost all species.

*ah well, another sigh again

There's one key difference between the supposed pro lifers "targeting women", and people that actually target and persecute the gays and the disabled persons and the ethnic minorities. By targeting those groups of people, somebody is actually targeting innocent people that aren't harming or affecting any innocent people in what they do.

By trying to pass laws that makes abortions illegal (which is totally irrelevant to this specific statement on whether or not you agree with us on the personhood status of the fetus), you're trying to protect innocent human life, which involves woman, yes, but the main goal of this pro life movement is not to target women at all?

And why would pro lifers hate the fact that "some women want to enjoy non-marital sex without getting pregnant"? No, seriously. When I discuss abortion with some pro lifers that I know in real life, I'll actually bring up this specific argument.

 

If that is true then why do they fight against contraception and comprehensive sex education in schools?
Contraception is the only proven way to reduce abortions, perhaps if pro-lifers put half the effort into contraception as they do into trying to make abortions illegal they would actually achieve something, as it is all they are doing is actually contributing to abortions by standing against contraception and comprehensive sex education.

If you want to see what decent access to contraception can do then look no further than Eastern Europe, since the break up of the USSR abortions in Eastern European countries have dropped by over 50% .. why, because now they have easier access to contraception.

So are you saying that it is ok to target people on the unproven fact that a fetus is a person . .how is that different from targeting homosexuals on the unproven fact that it is a mental disorder.
The problem with pro-lifers is that life only means something on their terms, ask them about executions, or war and suddenly that protection of life means nothing.

Problem is you cannot escape the fact that by making abortion illegal you are targeting specifically woman, and pregnant woman at that, simply because through the random act of her being female she has the womb.

Because many of them harken to a time where woman knew their place, and yes that includes some pro-life woman as well and why is that .. because that is what religion tells them is right, that woman are the property of men.

 

That first accusation against pro lifers- Well, to be very honest with you, despite some of my own personal convictions against that whole concept of contraceptions, if those contraceptions will actually help to reduce the amounts of abortions that happen, then I'm totally in favor of more contraceptions being taught in schools, and also more sex educations, etc. If that's gonna reduce the amount of abortions that will happen, well then I'm all for that being taught in these schools!

That second accusation against pro lifers-are you just referring to those religious views that are anti-pre maritial sex?

 

Then stand up and say so when-ever a pro-lifer stands against it

Partly, but also the belief (via god/bible) that women are second to men and should defer to them.

 

I wonder why the OP is too scared to tell me which women or women are pregnant in his photo of rude nasty people harrassing other people who are legally going about their business....


He said Oh look how pregnant she is and I asked how do you know and he ran away!!!!!

 

Hit and run pro-lifer .. pretty much sums most of them up

 

Slavery is slavery, and I support it, for whatever reason the slave owner feels he needs to own a slave.

 

Too bad for you it's illegal

 

It's not illegal in North Korea, therefore there's nothing morally wrong with it - as long as you only practice it in a country where it is legal.

 

I find it quite immoral, too bad you don't....that's probably why you think women should be nothing but slaves.

 

Well unlike slaves no one forces a woman to spread her legs at gunpoint.

 

OH? Guess here's another Anti-Choicer who has absolutetly NO knowledge of history....

 

You can have sex without opening your legs. It is possible. Why do all pro-lifers seem to have this idea that one must spread their legs to have vaginal intercourse? Are all your sex lives that dull?

 

Yep, Knew it would come the "blame the woman for everything" argument.

how about no one forces the man to insert his penis into the vagina and deposit his sperm there . .he should have kept his fly zipped.

 

Then why doensn't he have a say in abortion? Or in child support?

 

DUH, because, " no one forces the man to insert his penis into the vagina and deposit his sperm there"


That has NOTHING to do with whether or not he has a say in abortion...he usually doesn't since HE isn't pregnant.

And if he produces a child yes, he pays for it....now don't whine about that like a real man, the CHILD support is for the CHILD...it isn't to punish that poor por little man who couldn't keep it zipped...

 

Why should a man have to pay to support part of a woman's body, which she has 100% responsibly over? That makes no sense.

It would be like demanding that a woman be forced to pay for my penis enlargement surgery.

 

My condolences and ROFLMAO because you needed it....

 

Because once he has done the deed, so to speak, it is not his to have a say about, once it is born then he has a responsibility to the child.