Women's Right to Choose

morte, LPN, LVN · May 29, 2019

On ‎5‎/‎25‎/‎2019 at 9:43 PM, DancRN said:
https://www.heritage.org/marriage-and-family/commentary/new-report-shows-planned-parenthood-raked-15-billion-taxpayer-funds

try a better class of source

guest22519 · May 29, 2019

9 minutes ago, morte said:
try a better class of source

There are plenty out there, don’t be lazy and do your own research. This is just one of many. But I also know that if doesn’t say what you want to hear, then the source must be the problem, right?

morte, LPN, LVN · May 29, 2019

12 minutes ago, DancRN said:
There are plenty out there, don’t be lazy and do your own research. This is just one of many. But I also know that if doesn’t say what you want to hear, then the source must be the problem, right?

your brought the claim, you bring the citations. again, the feds do not pay for elective abortions. you claimed they do, prove it.

HomeBound · May 29, 2019

On 5/25/2019 at 5:25 PM, MunoRN said:
So do you believe bacteria should be protected? Are you opposed to the use of antibiotics? Hand washing? Laundering clothing?
And no tax money goes to fund abortions.

I ❤️ Muno. Please bring back that avatar of Bill Murray you used to use.

I just can't with this whole thing. I'm not sure if this type of stuff is cyclical---as in---here comes campaign season and plants are paid to throw one of the God, Guns and Gays Grenades into every civil discourse? Or is this really all people have to do---try and make arguments that are so highly charged that it can cause someone to build an explosive device to murder human adults?

So I guess I should ask---y'all who are just all on about rights and cells and all that---you're against the US Military going overseas and killing people, right? I mean...maybe a few of 'em are bad folks---but what about that "collateral damage"?

And....since all life is precious...you're vegan too, right? How about putting dogs and cats down in the pound who don't get adopted? What about scientific vivisection for medical purposes? Rats? Mice? How about baiting a fishing hook with a worm so you can catch dinner?

Want to go for the brass ring? What about capital punishment? If you're really going to live by what your book says---capital punishment is okay. That's taking a life. What if you're wrong and this person is innocent. This is a deliberate, premeditated act of ending someone's life. How does this square with the belief that all life is precious?

I'm not making fun. I'm pointing out the hypocrisy of extreme statements. If you feel that all life falls under this sanctity belief---then you should not be participating in the death of any life. Which includes all of the other creatures that share our planet. That includes little brown people on the other side of the earth. Just make sure that you don't allow your kids to join the military.

You can't have it both ways.

It really is disturbing that it's okay with some to force the victim of incest or a rape to bear a child...but then disappear when it comes time to deal with the consequences (supporting that child for the remainder of their lives) of forcing that situation.

What if I'm agnostic---and I don't believe in God until you prove it. So I get a pass---or is this "majority rules"--we get to force you to do it our way no matter your belief system---because we said so?

I know I'm going to get it for this---but why is it okay to kill adult humans and child humans in "war"---war, by the way, that politicians start--and it's not okay to terminate a pregnancy that was the result of a rape?

nursej22, MSN, RN · May 29, 2019

On 5/28/2019 at 1:41 PM, KonichiwaRN said:
Having said that..it's not black or white so I just let our Supreme Court decide on it.

They did. In 1973, Roe v. Wade. Perhaps you've heard of it.

MunoRN, RN · May 29, 2019

3 hours ago, Bjulissa19 said:
Lets get real here.
What you see is a baby in the making - just like after birth, even then babies appearance change over time as babies are growing and developing. If you took a picture at a new born baby and then another picture in 5 years, the child will look very, very different. but not any less the same person.
Do not negate the value of life just because its convenient.

At the other end of the spectrum of life, someone who is brain dead appears no different structurally than someone who is not, are you saying you don't recognize that brain death involves a different level of "life"?

MunoRN, RN · May 29, 2019

1 hour ago, DancRN said:
There are plenty out there, don’t be lazy and do your own research. This is just one of many. But I also know that if doesn’t say what you want to hear, then the source must be the problem, right?

You've yet to offer any evidence that the federal government funds abortions. You've correctly shown that the federal government pays for a portion of the non-abortion services PP provides (much of which goes towards preventing abortions), but have yet to provide any evidence that PP abortion services are even partly funded by federal funds. Maybe instead of telling people to research your claims you should start by providing at least one source that supports your claim.

Kooky Korky, BSN, RN · May 29, 2019

On 5/27/2019 at 7:12 PM, blondenurse12 said:
Certainly a polarizing topic but let's call a spade a spade. Abortion has nothing to do with 'life' and everything to do with controlling women and limiting economic mobility. The AL politicians said it themselves, that those embryos in labs aren't life, only embryos in female hosts are worthy of protecting.
I don't believe in the zombie sky king but even if you do, the bible says life does not begin until the first breath. It further advocates to 'dash a baby's head against stones' in certain cases and loads of other pleasantry.
Let's talk about facts. 2/3rds of abortions happen before 8 weeks, 89% before 12 weeks. 59% are already mothers, 75% are poor or low income, 62% have a religious affiliation, and 51% of women were using contraceptives when they became pregnant.
Many times, all I hear is 'well she should have kept her legs closed' or 'now it's her responsibility'. Do you hear how misogynistic and stupid you sound? Pregnancy is NOT a punishment for sex. No one seems to care that men flit away, off to impregnate some other woman, never to pay a cent in child support. Honestly, if you want to stop abortion then men should get mandatory vasectomies and when they are ready to procreate, they can get it reversed. Irresponsible ejaculation causes 100% of pregnancies. A woman can only get pregnant a few days per month and only birth 1 child per year but men can potentially father more than 365 children in a year.
About 12 years ago, I worked for a Catholic health system. I was taking hormonal birth control and I was having migraines with aura and became hypertensive. My GYN was concerned that I might have a stroke so I had to stop taking it. After some research, I decided an IUD was my best choice. It was considered 'abortion' and was not covered by my insurance. I made too much to qualify for an assistance as a RN. It cost $1200 and at the time, it was almost 3 weeks of my take home pay. I was recently out of school and had loans. I knew I couldn't afford a baby so I did it. I starved for 3 weeks, otherwise I wouldn't have been able to pay my bills.
This is what women have to deal with. To possibly die, to become pregnant and possibly die, or to suffer. No one seems to care about the mothers or hell, even the babies once they are born. To those who say 'just give up for adoption', do you have any clue how many kids are waiting in foster care? Instead of campaigning against abortion, campaign for resources for single parents, fund Planned Parenthood (because a very small part of their care is abortions), adopt kids in foster care. Literally do anything except forcing women to be incubators.

Not having sex outside of marriage will cut down on a whole lot of unwanted babies.

Why is it the responsibility of society at large and of pro-lifers in particular to care for all of the unwanted babies that other people are creating? Why don't women prevent a lot of these babies by just not having unprotected or out-of-wedlock sex? Yes, I read your statistics above. They need to get much more effective contraception.

And don't say men should prevent them. Of course they should, but it's the women who must do most of it, biologically speaking. And men should support their children. We do have some mechanisms in place for them to be financially supportive, but it's often hit or miss.

Slaughter of the pre-born, burning them with saline, cutting them up with knives, sucking them to pieces with a vacuum force - these are not the answer. Murdering them once they are already born is so gruesome, so unthinkable that I see swastikas and the Inquisition when I envision such evil goings on. Herod's Murder of the Innocents, Rachel weeping for her children.

See the movie "Unplanned". by Abby Johnson.

I agree that a lot of men are total deadbeats and the planet would be better off without them, but that isn't real likely to happen any time soon. Until then, women, unfortunately, bear the most responsibility to prevent pregnancy, since women are the carriers of pre-borns.

I'm sure what I have said matters not, I just am venting. But maybe someone will take to heart my suggestion that sex is best inside marriage.

While working in juvenile hall, I saw one teenager who was having her 3rd AB. There were plenty of girls there who had had at least 1. Do you really think this is a good thing? Why are we not seeing to it that these girls get either sterilized or get the tremendously effective methods of contraception that we have these days? Or, God forbid, stop having sex until you are married.

LilPeanut, MSN, RN, NP · May 29, 2019

5 hours ago, Bjulissa19 said:
Lets get real here.
What you see is a baby in the making - just like after birth, even then babies appearance change over time as babies are growing and developing. If you took a picture at a new born baby and then another picture in 5 years, the child will look very, very different. but not any less the same person.
Do not negate the value of life just because its convenient.

It has the potential to be a life. But until it can be separated from the person it is opportunistically feeding from, it is a parasite. (often a very loved parasite, but let's be honest about its role in the woman's body at that stage.)

15 minutes ago, Kooky Korky said:
Not having sex outside of marriage will cut down on a whole lot of unwanted babies.
Why is it the responsibility of society at large and of pro-lifers in particular to care for all of the unwanted babies that other people are creating? Why don't women prevent a lot of these babies by just not having unprotected or out-of-wedlock sex? Yes, I read your statistics above. They need to get much more effective contraception.
And don't say men should prevent them. Of course they should, but it's the women who must do most of it, biologically speaking. And men should support their children. We do have some mechanisms in place for them to be financially supportive, but it's often hit or miss.
Slaughter of the pre-born, burning them with saline, cutting them up with knives, sucking them to pieces with a vacuum force - these are not the answer. Murdering them once they are already born is so gruesome, so unthinkable that I see swastikas and the Inquisition when I envision such evil goings on. Herod's Murder of the Innocents, Rachel weeping for her children.
See the movie "Unplanned". by Abby Johnson.
I agree that a lot of men are total deadbeats and the planet would be better off without them, but that isn't real likely to happen any time soon. Until then, women, unfortunately, bear the most responsibility to prevent pregnancy, since women are the carriers of pre-borns.
I'm sure what I have said matters not, I just am venting. But maybe someone will take to heart my suggestion that sex is best inside marriage.
While working in juvenile hall, I saw one teenager who was having her 3rd AB. There were plenty of girls there who had had at least 1. Do you really think this is a good thing? Why are we not seeing to it that these girls get either sterilized or get the tremendously effective methods of contraception that we have these days? Or, God forbid, stop having sex until you are married.

So I'm 42. I have no intention to get married again. Does that mean that I should never be allowed to have sex again? (I can't in my case, but assuming I was normal)

FYI, it's not just men who dislike condoms. I also hate condoms. They were very uncomfortable for me always. I was the one begging to get everything tested so we could go without.

Again, since it seems to not be sinking in: making abortion illegal does not reduce the number of abortions. It only punishes women seeking them.

Social programs are what reduce the number of abortions. It is the only thing that reduces them.

So decreasing the number of abortions isn't what this law is going to do, you just want to make sure you kill as many women as possible while you do it?

CamMc · May 29, 2019

On 5/29/2019 at 12:48 AM, Kooky Korky said:
Not having sex outside of marriage will cut down on a whole lot of unwanted babies.
Why is it the responsibility of society at large and of pro-lifers in particular to care for all of the unwanted babies that other people are creating? Why don't women prevent a lot of these babies by just not having unprotected or out-of-wedlock sex? Yes, I read your statistics above. They need to get much more effective contraception.
And don't say men should prevent them. Of course they should, but it's the women who must do most of it, biologically speaking. And men should support their children. We do have some mechanisms in place for them to be financially supportive, but it's often hit or miss.
Slaughter of the pre-born, burning them with saline, cutting them up with knives, sucking them to pieces with a vacuum force - these are not the answer. Murdering them once they are already born is so gruesome, so unthinkable that I see swastikas and the Inquisition when I envision such evil goings on. Herod's Murder of the Innocents, Rachel weeping for her children.
See the movie "Unplanned". by Abby Johnson.
I agree that a lot of men are total deadbeats and the planet would be better off without them, but that isn't real likely to happen any time soon. Until then, women, unfortunately, bear the most responsibility to prevent pregnancy, since women are the carriers of pre-borns.
I'm sure what I have said matters not, I just am venting. But maybe someone will take to heart my suggestion that sex is best inside marriage.
While working in juvenile hall, I saw one teenager who was having her 3rd AB. There were plenty of girls there who had had at least 1. Do you really think this is a good thing? Why are we not seeing to it that these girls get either sterilized or get the tremendously effective methods of contraception that we have these days? Or, God forbid, stop having sex until you are married.

Because the idea of "not having sex outside of marriage" is antiquated and based in religion, so this once again goes into keeping religion out of state. I'm pretty sure your God stated something along the lines of "judge lest ye be judged," so you don't like abortion, don't have one, let god judge what happens to those who have abortions, just like god will judge the disgusting men raping innocent children and going into schools with guns. You have no idea what anyone else is going through and it's NOT your place to judge. Or did you miss that part in sunday school? Or let's just encourage gay sex, no one gets pregnant when two people of the same sex have intercourse, I'm sure you love that idea though

Bjulissa19 · May 29, 2019

16 hours ago, Persephone Paige said:
It's still better than nothing! Jeez, at least attempt to prevent pregnancy. And the foam helps pick up the slack with the condoms.
I hate a dialog that portrays women as victims. We are our biggest advocates, or our own worst enemies. If I were a nymphomaniac, with nothing but a Honda Kick & Go for transportation, I'd be damned if I'd get knocked up.
Have you actually investigated the numbers of abortions attributed to Rape, Incest and Maternal Health, vs the amount attributed to just 'whatever?' The differences are staggering. It's pathetic that any women would take so little responsibility for their own reproductive potential. These are not the women my daughters are like, or the women I want my granddaughters to become.
You want to empower women? Teach them that they have the power to not need permission from anyone for any abortion by seeing to it that they don't get pregnant. I did it, my daughter did it and God willing, my granddaughters will too. I cannot prevent tragedies, such as rape. But, I can send them to self defense classes.

Exactly. why are women using abortion as a contraception? killing of the unborn has been so desensitised - pro-choice supporters are calling the unborn parasite? that's not even science based. a baby is the product of two people having intercourse (not the cause of all life's problems). do it responsibly.

LilPeanut, MSN, RN, NP · May 29, 2019

1 hour ago, Bjulissa19 said:
Exactly. why are women using abortion as a contraception? killing of the unborn has been so desensitised - pro-choice supporters are calling the unborn parasite? that's not even science based. a baby is the product of two people having intercourse (not the cause of all life's problems). do it responsibly.

If you do not want to be pregnant, that is exactly what it is.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/parasite

It derives nutrients from the mother, at her expense if needed, without any positive physical benefits. Emotionally, there are endless benefits, if the child is wanted. Otherwise, it continues to be a parasite.

Also, life is a terminal, sexually transmitted condition.