I just want leftists women to know

[Dove]

That stopping a barbaric practice of burning late term fetal humans alive from the inside out, or having them pulled apart....dismembered while still alive, or any direct killing of them really is not fucking better than perinatal hospice. Which shows BETTER results for both grieving parents and the babies who can pass peacefully and painlessly if they are dying.

Unless you want someone to rip your body apart or force you to inhale enough saline to burn you alive just because you are dying.....you shouldn't be defending that brutal treatment of human beings

And those stories you read in leftwing propaganda pieces are all bullshit BTW. You guys refuse to hear anyones lived experience or opinions if it's not supporting what you want.

And its mysogeny and imposing on women when we are only offered abortion in these traumatic circumstances because YOU guys need your narrative. You just help block any fucking meaningful progress for women. Any paid maternity leave. Insurance covering perinatal hospice. Cant happen.....because you tireless soldiers of the patriarchy defend violence so hard.

It's just SO important to you that women get abortions.

BUT losing our sex based rights? Being forced to allow MEN into our spaces and all the calls for psychotically hateful VIOLENCE against women deemed "transphobes".....women getting raped and beaten by MEN in prison because a rapist abuser knew he could just say he is woman to get in there? THATS not imposing on women to you.

If they get impregnated by a man who raped them in prison or even a domestic violence shelter.....you will fight for them to get it abortions.

That's ALL you guys give a fuck about for women. Go ahead and take away our sports, our privacy and safety and everything for women....but better make sure they can kill another human being. There is gonna be more so....abortion will be needed.

You are just FAKE.

Fuck your abortion bullshit. You cant even defend it. You are just partisan fucking cowards who will cower to your "side" even as they openly strip rights away from women and incite and encourage violence towards women who defend these rights. COWARDS.

 

[Joe]

...but would you ever consider abortions within the first 2-3 months of pregnancy a legitimate option, Dovey?

 

[LotusBud]

I hope you are saving these posts for you memoir.

 

[Dove]

...but would you ever consider abortions within the first 2-3 months of pregnancy a legitimate option, Dovey?

No.

But do you wonder WHY... with the squashing of womens sex based rights.....why is abortion all that matters as far as womens rights?

 

[Dove]

I hope you are saving these posts for you memoir.

You probably still wouldnt read it!

 

[Joe]

...but would you ever consider abortions within the first 2-3 months of pregnancy a legitimate option, Dovey?

.....why is abortion all that matters as far as womens rights?

....because these women who you are opposed to, see it as freedom from drudgery.

They don't wanna get stuck raising children, I guess.

 

[Joe]

...but would you ever consider abortions within the first 2-3 months of pregnancy a legitimate option, Dovey?

No.

But do you wonder WHY... with the squashing of womens sex based rights.....

Actually Dovey, after reading your anti-abortion posts through the years, you have advanced some persuasive arguments that abortion too late in the cycle may not be ideal.

Perhaps there is an argument to discourage abortions when the fetus is too developed & the would be mother comes too late and asks for an abortion.

Like...couldn't they have done it sooner?

That being said, I still think there should be an option for the woman to abort early on or for health reasons.

 

[Dove]

...but would you ever consider abortions within the first 2-3 months of pregnancy a legitimate option, Dovey?

No.

But do you wonder WHY... with the squashing of womens sex based rights.....

Actually Dovey, after reading your anti-abortion posts through the years, you have advanced some persuasive arguments that abortion too late in the cycle may not be ideal.

Perhaps there is an argument to discourage abortions when the fetus is too developed & the would be mother comes too late and asks for an abortion.

Like...couldn't they have done it sooner?

That being said, I still think there should be an option for the woman to abort early on or for health reasons.

I wouldn't argue for why it's worse to kill a 5 year old than it is to kill a one year old, Joe.

That's the same exact logic.

That's the same human being. And if it's okay to kill that human at one stage.....its gonna be okay to kill that human at any stage.

Even with all our knowledge and advancements.....we have become more brutal and more lacking in mercy and compassion. People are arguing for fucking infanticide.

This is all pure heartless evil what's being done to human beings. In abortion and now with stripping rights from women.

We have all kinds of options to avoid pregnancy. JS.

 

[Succubus]

...but would you ever consider abortions within the first 2-3 months of pregnancy a legitimate option, Dovey?

No.

But do you wonder WHY... with the squashing of womens sex based rights.....

Actually Dovey, after reading your anti-abortion posts through the years, you have advanced some persuasive arguments that abortion too late in the cycle may not be ideal.

Perhaps there is an argument to discourage abortions when the fetus is too developed & the would be mother comes too late and asks for an abortion.

Like...couldn't they have done it sooner?

That being said, I still think there should be an option for the woman to abort early on or for health reasons.

I somewhat agree with you on the terms of early abortion IF BOTH mother and fetus are at risk from dying only. A perfect example of this is an ectopic pregnancy or a pregnancy inside the fallopian tube. There is no way to save the baby and if the mother allows this pregnancy to continue it will prove both fatal to her and the child. This would be a no brainer. Better to save one than none and the baby wouldn't make it to begin with. I am absolutely 100% anti abortion. If there were a way to save the fetus in an ectopic pregnancy then I would say let the pregnancy continue if both mother and baby can be saved but so far there are no medical services that can be provided to do so. I also agree with Dovey. There are too many ways to prevent pregnancy and so many resources out there for women that don't want children. Abortion shouldn't be allowed UNLESS both mother and child won't make it from allowing the pregnancy to continue.

 

[LotusBud]

...but would you ever consider abortions within the first 2-3 months of pregnancy a legitimate option, Dovey?

.....why is abortion all that matters as far as womens rights?

....because these women who you are opposed to, see it as freedom from drudgery.

They don't wanna get stuck raising children, I guess.

It's not that simple. Many women who get abortions can't possibly afford to have a child, or they are in abusive relationships, or they have mental health and even physical health issues. There are many, many reasons why women can't always have a child. It's a women's rights issue when it comes to the idea that women don't have the right to refuse to become a mother, and yet men can decide.

And abortion is not at all the only thing that matters as far as women's rights, PK Dove. Who ever said that?

If you don't believe in abortion, don't have one. No one has the right to force someone they don't even know to give birth to a child. Everyone has different ethics, and abortion is legal, so get the fuck out.

And, Joe, late abortions are terrible, but still, that's bwtween a woman and her doctor if there is a good reason to have one. This hysterai over late-term abortions is largely based on a fantasy. Very few women have them, and they are almost always because of extreme situations.

 

[Joe]

...but would you ever consider abortions within the first 2-3 months of pregnancy a legitimate option, Dovey?

No.

But do you wonder WHY... with the squashing of womens sex based rights.....

Actually Dovey, after reading your anti-abortion posts through the years, you have advanced some persuasive arguments that abortion too late in the cycle may not be ideal.

Perhaps there is an argument to discourage abortions when the fetus is too developed & the would be mother comes too late and asks for an abortion.

Like...couldn't they have done it sooner?

That being said, I still think there should be an option for the woman to abort early on or for health reasons.

I wouldn't argue for why it's worse to kill a 5 year old than it is to kill a one year old, Joe.

That's the same exact logic.

That's the same human being. And if it's okay to kill that human at one stage.....its gonna be okay to kill that human at any stage.

Even with all our knowledge and advancements.....we have become more brutal and more lacking in mercy and compassion. People are arguing for fucking infanticide.

This is all pure heartless evil what's being done to human beings. In abortion and now with stripping rights from women.

We have all kinds of options to avoid pregnancy. JS.

Well, if they want women to keep their babies, then we'd be better be prepared to expand the welfare state.

ie - Maternity leave for them, government subsidized daycare, more money for education.

Of course, that can't be done on a shoestring. And it takes higher taxes.

Y'know I helped one of my firneds out once, lent him some money so that the mother of his child and his child wouldn't be evicted from their apartment. And in doing so, I think it made all the difference in the child's development.

Occasionally, I see the child, and she looks so happy and well adjusted now because she''s in a good neighborhood with decent services.

But if I hadn't helped them, they would have been kicked out onto the street or forced to move to a bad crime ridden neighborhood - which would have been bad for the child's development.

Point being - when a child comes into the world - they become everybody's responsibility.

Even if they're not your child, you can't turn your back on them.

So people who say they want mothers to keep their babies, but then want cutsin the welfare state or social services, are the worst kind of hypocrites imho.

If we want mothers to keep their babies, then we'd all better be prpeared to help them pay for it.

 

[Succubus]

...but would you ever consider abortions within the first 2-3 months of pregnancy a legitimate option, Dovey?

No.

But do you wonder WHY... with the squashing of womens sex based rights.....

Actually Dovey, after reading your anti-abortion posts through the years, you have advanced some persuasive arguments that abortion too late in the cycle may not be ideal.

Perhaps there is an argument to discourage abortions when the fetus is too developed & the would be mother comes too late and asks for an abortion.

Like...couldn't they have done it sooner?

That being said, I still think there should be an option for the woman to abort early on or for health reasons.

I wouldn't argue for why it's worse to kill a 5 year old than it is to kill a one year old, Joe.

That's the same exact logic.

That's the same human being. And if it's okay to kill that human at one stage.....its gonna be okay to kill that human at any stage.

Even with all our knowledge and advancements.....we have become more brutal and more lacking in mercy and compassion. People are arguing for fucking infanticide.

This is all pure heartless evil what's being done to human beings. In abortion and now with stripping rights from women.

We have all kinds of options to avoid pregnancy. JS.

Well, if they want women to keep their babies, then we'd be better be prepared to expand the welfare state.

ie - Maternity leave for them, government subsidized daycare, more money for education.

Of course, that can't be done on a shoestring. And it takes higher taxes.

Y'know I helped one of my firneds out once, lent him some money so that the mother of his child and his child wouldn't be evicted from their apartment. And in doing so, I think it made all the difference in the child's development.

Occasionally, I see the child, and she looks so happy and well adjusted now because she''s in a good neighborhood with decent services.

But if I hadn't helped them, they would have been kicked out onto the street or forced to move to a bad crime ridden neighborhood - which would have been bad for the child's development.

Point being - when a child comes into the world - they become everybody's responsibility.

Even if they're not your child, you can't turn your back on them.

So people who say they want mothers to keep their babies, but then want cutsin the welfare state or social services, or the worst kind of hypocrites imho.

If we want mothers to keep their babies, then we'd all better be prpeared to help them pay for it.

But these things are all known in advance....prior to a woman becoming pregnant...in most cases they are thought through when the decision is made to have a child with someone. I agree with you....if you want to have a child with someone, you better make damn sure you can care for that child on your own or with your partner. I know shit happens in life, divorces, etc. That shit should be played out as a "what if", too. So should we just stop procreation altogether just because it costs more money? There is no monetary value that should be placed on human life.

 

[Dove]

...but would you ever consider abortions within the first 2-3 months of pregnancy a legitimate option, Dovey?

.....why is abortion all that matters as far as womens rights?

....because these women who you are opposed to, see it as freedom from drudgery.

They don't wanna get stuck raising children, I guess.

It's not that simple. Many women who get abortions can't possibly afford to have a child, or they are in abusive relationships, or they have mental health and even physical health issues. There are many, many reasons why women can't always have a child. It's a women's rights issue when it comes to the idea that women don't have the right to refuse to become a mother, and yet men can decide.

And abortion is not at all the only thing that matters as far as women's rights, PK Dove. Who ever said that?

If you don't believe in abortion, don't have one. No one has the right to force someone they don't even know to give birth to a child. Everyone has different ethics, and abortion is legal, so get the fuck out.

I had an abortion, Lotus.

You are saying that human beings are valueless. That we should just make it legal to kill and offer that.

And A LOT of women who abort are being pressured and coerced by the man or her family.

Abortion seems to be all that matters to left wing women, because NONE of you are speaking out about the loss of our sex based rights, the silencing and hatred and violence spewed at women who DO defend their rights.

Right now women in prison....for drugs charges btw.....are being raped by violent abusers who said they identified as women and were put in womens prison. You guys aren't talking about that in ANY left wing groups. But there is plenty gaslighting about abortion opposition being about "imposing" on women. Its NOT.

Imposing on women is the man who whipped his dick out in front of a little girl in a womans spa. And how antifa showed up to SILENCE and threaten women who were protesting.

 

[LotusBud]

...but would you ever consider abortions within the first 2-3 months of pregnancy a legitimate option, Dovey?

No.

But do you wonder WHY... with the squashing of womens sex based rights.....

Actually Dovey, after reading your anti-abortion posts through the years, you have advanced some persuasive arguments that abortion too late in the cycle may not be ideal.

Perhaps there is an argument to discourage abortions when the fetus is too developed & the would be mother comes too late and asks for an abortion.

Like...couldn't they have done it sooner?

That being said, I still think there should be an option for the woman to abort early on or for health reasons.

I wouldn't argue for why it's worse to kill a 5 year old than it is to kill a one year old, Joe.

That's the same exact logic.

That's the same human being. And if it's okay to kill that human at one stage.....its gonna be okay to kill that human at any stage.

Even with all our knowledge and advancements.....we have become more brutal and more lacking in mercy and compassion. People are arguing for fucking infanticide.

This is all pure heartless evil what's being done to human beings. In abortion and now with stripping rights from women.

We have all kinds of options to avoid pregnancy. JS.

Well, if they want women to keep their babies, then we'd be better be prepared to expand the welfare state.

ie - Maternity leave for them, government subsidized daycare, more money for education.

Of course, that can't be done on a shoestring. And it takes higher taxes.

Y'know I helped one of my firneds out once, lent him some money so that the mother of his child and his child wouldn't be evicted from their apartment. And in doing so, I think it made all the difference in the child's development.

Occasionally, I see the child, and she looks so happy and well adjusted now because she''s in a good neighborhood with decent services.

But if I hadn't helped them, they would have been kicked out onto the street or forced to move to a bad crime ridden neighborhood - which would have been bad for the child's development.

Point being - when a child comes into the world - they become everybody's responsibility.

Even if they're not your child, you can't turn your back on them.

So people who say they want mothers to keep their babies, but then want cutsin the welfare state or social services, or the worst kind of hypocrites imho.

If we want mothers to keep their babies, then we'd all better be prpeared to help them pay for it.

I agree 100%.

 

[LotusBud]

...but would you ever consider abortions within the first 2-3 months of pregnancy a legitimate option, Dovey?

No.

But do you wonder WHY... with the squashing of womens sex based rights.....

Actually Dovey, after reading your anti-abortion posts through the years, you have advanced some persuasive arguments that abortion too late in the cycle may not be ideal.

Perhaps there is an argument to discourage abortions when the fetus is too developed & the would be mother comes too late and asks for an abortion.

Like...couldn't they have done it sooner?

That being said, I still think there should be an option for the woman to abort early on or for health reasons.

I wouldn't argue for why it's worse to kill a 5 year old than it is to kill a one year old, Joe.

That's the same exact logic.

That's the same human being. And if it's okay to kill that human at one stage.....its gonna be okay to kill that human at any stage.

Even with all our knowledge and advancements.....we have become more brutal and more lacking in mercy and compassion. People are arguing for fucking infanticide.

This is all pure heartless evil what's being done to human beings. In abortion and now with stripping rights from women.

We have all kinds of options to avoid pregnancy. JS.

Well, if they want women to keep their babies, then we'd be better be prepared to expand the welfare state.

ie - Maternity leave for them, government subsidized daycare, more money for education.

Of course, that can't be done on a shoestring. And it takes higher taxes.

Y'know I helped one of my firneds out once, lent him some money so that the mother of his child and his child wouldn't be evicted from their apartment. And in doing so, I think it made all the difference in the child's development.

Occasionally, I see the child, and she looks so happy and well adjusted now because she''s in a good neighborhood with decent services.

But if I hadn't helped them, they would have been kicked out onto the street or forced to move to a bad crime ridden neighborhood - which would have been bad for the child's development.

Point being - when a child comes into the world - they become everybody's responsibility.

Even if they're not your child, you can't turn your back on them.

So people who say they want mothers to keep their babies, but then want cutsin the welfare state or social services, or the worst kind of hypocrites imho.

If we want mothers to keep their babies, then we'd all better be prpeared to help them pay for it.

But these things are all known in advance....prior to a woman becoming pregnant...in most cases they are thought through when the decision is made to have a child with someone. I agree with you....if you want to have a child with someone, you better make damn sure you can care for that child on your own or with your partner. I know shit happens in life, divorces, etc. That shit should be played out as a "what if", too. So should we just stop procreation altogether just because it costs more money? There is no monetary value that should be placed on human life.

...but would you ever consider abortions within the first 2-3 months of pregnancy a legitimate option, Dovey?

No.

But do you wonder WHY... with the squashing of womens sex based rights.....

Actually Dovey, after reading your anti-abortion posts through the years, you have advanced some persuasive arguments that abortion too late in the cycle may not be ideal.

Perhaps there is an argument to discourage abortions when the fetus is too developed & the would be mother comes too late and asks for an abortion.

Like...couldn't they have done it sooner?

That being said, I still think there should be an option for the woman to abort early on or for health reasons.

I wouldn't argue for why it's worse to kill a 5 year old than it is to kill a one year old, Joe.

That's the same exact logic.

That's the same human being. And if it's okay to kill that human at one stage.....its gonna be okay to kill that human at any stage.

Even with all our knowledge and advancements.....we have become more brutal and more lacking in mercy and compassion. People are arguing for fucking infanticide.

This is all pure heartless evil what's being done to human beings. In abortion and now with stripping rights from women.

We have all kinds of options to avoid pregnancy. JS.

Well, if they want women to keep their babies, then we'd be better be prepared to expand the welfare state.

ie - Maternity leave for them, government subsidized daycare, more money for education.

Of course, that can't be done on a shoestring. And it takes higher taxes.

Y'know I helped one of my firneds out once, lent him some money so that the mother of his child and his child wouldn't be evicted from their apartment. And in doing so, I think it made all the difference in the child's development.

Occasionally, I see the child, and she looks so happy and well adjusted now because she''s in a good neighborhood with decent services.

But if I hadn't helped them, they would have been kicked out onto the street or forced to move to a bad crime ridden neighborhood - which would have been bad for the child's development.

Point being - when a child comes into the world - they become everybody's responsibility.

Even if they're not your child, you can't turn your back on them.

So people who say they want mothers to keep their babies, but then want cutsin the welfare state or social services, or the worst kind of hypocrites imho.

If we want mothers to keep their babies, then we'd all better be prpeared to help them pay for it.

But these things are all known in advance....prior to a woman becoming pregnant...in most cases they are thought through when the decision is made to have a child with someone. I agree with you....if you want to have a child with someone, you better make damn sure you can care for that child on your own or with your partner. I know shit happens in life, divorces, etc. That shit should be played out as a "what if", too. So should we just stop procreation altogether just because it costs more money? There is no monetary value that should be placed on human life.

Oh, well, if a woman knew in advance, then it's OK for a child to be born into poverty and to become homeless, or go without meals, or to be abused, etc. Because, well, they knew in advance.

 

[Dove]

...but would you ever consider abortions within the first 2-3 months of pregnancy a legitimate option, Dovey?

No.

But do you wonder WHY... with the squashing of womens sex based rights.....

Actually Dovey, after reading your anti-abortion posts through the years, you have advanced some persuasive arguments that abortion too late in the cycle may not be ideal.

Perhaps there is an argument to discourage abortions when the fetus is too developed & the would be mother comes too late and asks for an abortion.

Like...couldn't they have done it sooner?

That being said, I still think there should be an option for the woman to abort early on or for health reasons.

I wouldn't argue for why it's worse to kill a 5 year old than it is to kill a one year old, Joe.

That's the same exact logic.

That's the same human being. And if it's okay to kill that human at one stage.....its gonna be okay to kill that human at any stage.

Even with all our knowledge and advancements.....we have become more brutal and more lacking in mercy and compassion. People are arguing for fucking infanticide.

This is all pure heartless evil what's being done to human beings. In abortion and now with stripping rights from women.

We have all kinds of options to avoid pregnancy. JS.

Well, if they want women to keep their babies, then we'd be better be prepared to expand the welfare state.

ie - Maternity leave for them, government subsidized daycare, more money for education.

Of course, that can't be done on a shoestring. And it takes higher taxes.

Y'know I helped one of my firneds out once, lent him some money so that the mother of his child and his child wouldn't be evicted from their apartment. And in doing so, I think it made all the difference in the child's development.

Occasionally, I see the child, and she looks so happy and well adjusted now because she''s in a good neighborhood with decent services.

But if I hadn't helped them, they would have been kicked out onto the street or forced to move to a bad crime ridden neighborhood - which would have been bad for the child's development.

Point being - when a child comes into the world - they become everybody's responsibility.

Even if they're not your child, you can't turn your back on them.

So people who say they want mothers to keep their babies, but then want cutsin the welfare state or social services, or the worst kind of hypocrites imho.

If we want mothers to keep their babies, then we'd all better be prpeared to help them pay for it.

But these things are all known in advance....prior to a woman becoming pregnant...in most cases they are thought through when the decision is made to have a child with someone. I agree with you....if you want to have a child with someone, you better make damn sure you can care for that child on your own or with your partner. I know shit happens in life, divorces, etc. That shit should be played out as a "what if", too. So should we just stop procreation altogether just because it costs more money? There is no monetary value that should be placed on human life.

Abortion is another way hatred and disregard of women is demonstrated by the left wing.

You cant talk about abortion regret. How because of the abortion natrative....you DONT get full disclosure (they lie to your face and take your money.....and if you start bleeding or something happens? All they care about is hiding it. Women have been severely injured....they blame US). If a woman commits suicide due to abortion? Pro abortion women laugh, degrade her and harrass her family. I shit you not.

Abortion doctors have everything on their records from medical neglect, misconduct, sexual abuse, domestic violence.....and CANNIBALISM. There are more Gosnels and Pendergrafts than they will admit. Misuse of narcs. All kinds of shit.

All these place fail basic health and safety standards and when they get cited, they scream "omg abortion access is being restricted!" and left wing women jump into action.....making sure they dont have to meet basic standards.

They call EVERY nasty TRUTH "pro life propaganda" and ignore it.

Minor rape victims are taken in by abusers and released back to abusers.

Everything I've said can be cited.......but these new wave fake feminists? Dont care.

If you are feminist you'll support it no matter what.....you'll praise it.....and you'll include transwomen no matter how dangerous and harmful gender legislation is.

OR you are a transphobe and deserve to die. Or you are "attacking womens rights" and deserve to die.

That's the game. Ruthlessly bully and intimidate and threaten any women who speak any truth about these issues.

 

[Dove]

...but would you ever consider abortions within the first 2-3 months of pregnancy a legitimate option, Dovey?

No.

But do you wonder WHY... with the squashing of womens sex based rights.....

Actually Dovey, after reading your anti-abortion posts through the years, you have advanced some persuasive arguments that abortion too late in the cycle may not be ideal.

Perhaps there is an argument to discourage abortions when the fetus is too developed & the would be mother comes too late and asks for an abortion.

Like...couldn't they have done it sooner?

That being said, I still think there should be an option for the woman to abort early on or for health reasons.

I wouldn't argue for why it's worse to kill a 5 year old than it is to kill a one year old, Joe.

That's the same exact logic.

That's the same human being. And if it's okay to kill that human at one stage.....its gonna be okay to kill that human at any stage.

Even with all our knowledge and advancements.....we have become more brutal and more lacking in mercy and compassion. People are arguing for fucking infanticide.

This is all pure heartless evil what's being done to human beings. In abortion and now with stripping rights from women.

We have all kinds of options to avoid pregnancy. JS.

Well, if they want women to keep their babies, then we'd be better be prepared to expand the welfare state.

ie - Maternity leave for them, government subsidized daycare, more money for education.

Of course, that can't be done on a shoestring. And it takes higher taxes.

Y'know I helped one of my firneds out once, lent him some money so that the mother of his child and his child wouldn't be evicted from their apartment. And in doing so, I think it made all the difference in the child's development.

Occasionally, I see the child, and she looks so happy and well adjusted now because she''s in a good neighborhood with decent services.

But if I hadn't helped them, they would have been kicked out onto the street or forced to move to a bad crime ridden neighborhood - which would have been bad for the child's development.

Point being - when a child comes into the world - they become everybody's responsibility.

Even if they're not your child, you can't turn your back on them.

So people who say they want mothers to keep their babies, but then want cutsin the welfare state or social services, or the worst kind of hypocrites imho.

If we want mothers to keep their babies, then we'd all better be prpeared to help them pay for it.

I agree 100%.

Good thing there are not just tens of thousands of people wanting to adopt who would pay for everything......but also more crisis resource centers, womens clinics that go on sliding scale, state insurance, outreaches that provide everything from rides, shelter, med expenses and baby gear and support for moms and children literally everywhere.

That offer rape support as well.

Can you imagine if the gross amounts of money that went to PP.....which was founded in racist hate......went into these resources?

The problems would be solved.

But there is a PP in every poor minority area and other resources for women are attacked for being "fake clinics"

 

[Dove]

But I guess over on the left, they just care that you can get an abortion after you get raped by a man who identifies as a woman.

That's literally all I see. And then fake outrage if a Republican man gets accused of holding someone down.

While women are attacked by antifa for protesting predators exposing themselves to children.

You cannot make this up.

Leftists hate women. That's all there is to it. They only care about their ideology and bullying people to accept it. That's it.

 

[Dove]

...but would you ever consider abortions within the first 2-3 months of pregnancy a legitimate option, Dovey?

No.

But do you wonder WHY... with the squashing of womens sex based rights.....

Actually Dovey, after reading your anti-abortion posts through the years, you have advanced some persuasive arguments that abortion too late in the cycle may not be ideal.

Perhaps there is an argument to discourage abortions when the fetus is too developed & the would be mother comes too late and asks for an abortion.

Like...couldn't they have done it sooner?

That being said, I still think there should be an option for the woman to abort early on or for health reasons.

I somewhat agree with you on the terms of early abortion IF BOTH mother and fetus are at risk from dying only. A perfect example of this is an ectopic pregnancy or a pregnancy inside the fallopian tube. There is no way to save the baby and if the mother allows this pregnancy to continue it will prove both fatal to her and the child. This would be a no brainer. Better to save one than none and the baby wouldn't make it to begin with. I am absolutely 100% anti abortion. If there were a way to save the fetus in an ectopic pregnancy then I would say let the pregnancy continue if both mother and baby can be saved but so far there are no medical services that can be provided to do so. I also agree with Dovey. There are too many ways to prevent pregnancy and so many resources out there for women that don't want children. Abortion shouldn't be allowed UNLESS both mother and child won't make it from allowing the pregnancy to continue.

The good news is, intervention of an ectopic isnt an abortion, isnt done in abortion clinics.

In fact that's another thing. The pro aborts ignorantly fight against ultrasounds not realizing they need to confirm it's not etopic.

They hate women.

PP shoved a bleeding woman onto the sidewalk where she called 911.....she almost fucking DIED. I'll find that video....the "harrassers" on the sidewalk rushed to her aid. Oh and the clinic had the cops called because they went on the property to help the hemorrhaging women they shoved out.

You cannot expect these places to have ANY ethics. Because what they do is so heartless....you cant expect them to magically care about life.

 

[Dove]

...but would you ever consider abortions within the first 2-3 months of pregnancy a legitimate option, Dovey?

No.

But do you wonder WHY... with the squashing of womens sex based rights.....

Actually Dovey, after reading your anti-abortion posts through the years, you have advanced some persuasive arguments that abortion too late in the cycle may not be ideal.

Perhaps there is an argument to discourage abortions when the fetus is too developed & the would be mother comes too late and asks for an abortion.

Like...couldn't they have done it sooner?

That being said, I still think there should be an option for the woman to abort early on or for health reasons.

I wouldn't argue for why it's worse to kill a 5 year old than it is to kill a one year old, Joe.

That's the same exact logic.

That's the same human being. And if it's okay to kill that human at one stage.....its gonna be okay to kill that human at any stage.

Even with all our knowledge and advancements.....we have become more brutal and more lacking in mercy and compassion. People are arguing for fucking infanticide.

This is all pure heartless evil what's being done to human beings. In abortion and now with stripping rights from women.

We have all kinds of options to avoid pregnancy. JS.

Well, if they want women to keep their babies, then we'd be better be prepared to expand the welfare state.

ie - Maternity leave for them, government subsidized daycare, more money for education.

Of course, that can't be done on a shoestring. And it takes higher taxes.

Y'know I helped one of my firneds out once, lent him some money so that the mother of his child and his child wouldn't be evicted from their apartment. And in doing so, I think it made all the difference in the child's development.

Occasionally, I see the child, and she looks so happy and well adjusted now because she''s in a good neighborhood with decent services.

But if I hadn't helped them, they would have been kicked out onto the street or forced to move to a bad crime ridden neighborhood - which would have been bad for the child's development.

Point being - when a child comes into the world - they become everybody's responsibility.

Even if they're not your child, you can't turn your back on them.

So people who say they want mothers to keep their babies, but then want cutsin the welfare state or social services, or the worst kind of hypocrites imho.

If we want mothers to keep their babies, then we'd all better be prpeared to help them pay for it.

But these things are all known in advance....prior to a woman becoming pregnant...in most cases they are thought through when the decision is made to have a child with someone. I agree with you....if you want to have a child with someone, you better make damn sure you can care for that child on your own or with your partner. I know shit happens in life, divorces, etc. That shit should be played out as a "what if", too. So should we just stop procreation altogether just because it costs more money? There is no monetary value that should be placed on human life.

...but would you ever consider abortions within the first 2-3 months of pregnancy a legitimate option, Dovey?

No.

But do you wonder WHY... with the squashing of womens sex based rights.....

Actually Dovey, after reading your anti-abortion posts through the years, you have advanced some persuasive arguments that abortion too late in the cycle may not be ideal.

Perhaps there is an argument to discourage abortions when the fetus is too developed & the would be mother comes too late and asks for an abortion.

Like...couldn't they have done it sooner?

That being said, I still think there should be an option for the woman to abort early on or for health reasons.

I wouldn't argue for why it's worse to kill a 5 year old than it is to kill a one year old, Joe.

That's the same exact logic.

That's the same human being. And if it's okay to kill that human at one stage.....its gonna be okay to kill that human at any stage.

Even with all our knowledge and advancements.....we have become more brutal and more lacking in mercy and compassion. People are arguing for fucking infanticide.

This is all pure heartless evil what's being done to human beings. In abortion and now with stripping rights from women.

We have all kinds of options to avoid pregnancy. JS.

Well, if they want women to keep their babies, then we'd be better be prepared to expand the welfare state.

ie - Maternity leave for them, government subsidized daycare, more money for education.

Of course, that can't be done on a shoestring. And it takes higher taxes.

Y'know I helped one of my firneds out once, lent him some money so that the mother of his child and his child wouldn't be evicted from their apartment. And in doing so, I think it made all the difference in the child's development.

Occasionally, I see the child, and she looks so happy and well adjusted now because she''s in a good neighborhood with decent services.

But if I hadn't helped them, they would have been kicked out onto the street or forced to move to a bad crime ridden neighborhood - which would have been bad for the child's development.

Point being - when a child comes into the world - they become everybody's responsibility.

Even if they're not your child, you can't turn your back on them.

So people who say they want mothers to keep their babies, but then want cutsin the welfare state or social services, or the worst kind of hypocrites imho.

If we want mothers to keep their babies, then we'd all better be prpeared to help them pay for it.

But these things are all known in advance....prior to a woman becoming pregnant...in most cases they are thought through when the decision is made to have a child with someone. I agree with you....if you want to have a child with someone, you better make damn sure you can care for that child on your own or with your partner. I know shit happens in life, divorces, etc. That shit should be played out as a "what if", too. So should we just stop procreation altogether just because it costs more money? There is no monetary value that should be placed on human life.

Oh, well, if a woman knew in advance, then it's OK for a child to be born into poverty and to become homeless, or go without meals, or to be abused, etc. Because, well, they knew in advance.

Tons of people out there begging to adopt that would pay for everything.

And.....children get abused more now. Abortion doesnt stop abuse. In fact our cheapened view of life probably fuels abuse.

Also you are saying that children who are born into less than good circumstances do not have worth and shouldnt get to live. I was born in poverty, I wasnt treated well by my mother

I know others who have survived abuse and poverty.

Are you prepared to tell me and others we would have better off dead? Because that's what you are saying.

Most of us are grateful for our lives. You are talking about cheating the world of some of the best people because their circumstances make you uncomfortable.

Put some more thought into that, Lotus. Because you probably mean well and havent really considered the philosophical implications of what you are saying and how they impact your view of our human rights.

 

[Dove]

...but would you ever consider abortions within the first 2-3 months of pregnancy a legitimate option, Dovey?

.....why is abortion all that matters as far as womens rights?

....because these women who you are opposed to, see it as freedom from drudgery.

They don't wanna get stuck raising children, I guess.

We can get sterilized.

And yes... .there is always an OB that will do it. AND....if there wasnt? Fight that bullshit. That actually IS a my body my choice circumstance.

 

[Joe]

We can get sterilized.

And yes... .there is always an OB that will do it. AND....if there wasnt? Fight that bullshit. That actually IS a my body my choice circumstance.

I think that's already been tried.

It was used by eugenicists to sterilize 'undersireables' - meaning Black women in places like Alabama during the 1930s

.

 

[LotusBud]

Jesus Christ, PK Dove. Stop it.

 

[LotusBud]

...but would you ever consider abortions within the first 2-3 months of pregnancy a legitimate option, Dovey?

No.

But do you wonder WHY... with the squashing of womens sex based rights.....

Actually Dovey, after reading your anti-abortion posts through the years, you have advanced some persuasive arguments that abortion too late in the cycle may not be ideal.

Perhaps there is an argument to discourage abortions when the fetus is too developed & the would be mother comes too late and asks for an abortion.

Like...couldn't they have done it sooner?

That being said, I still think there should be an option for the woman to abort early on or for health reasons.

I wouldn't argue for why it's worse to kill a 5 year old than it is to kill a one year old, Joe.

That's the same exact logic.

That's the same human being. And if it's okay to kill that human at one stage.....its gonna be okay to kill that human at any stage.

Even with all our knowledge and advancements.....we have become more brutal and more lacking in mercy and compassion. People are arguing for fucking infanticide.

This is all pure heartless evil what's being done to human beings. In abortion and now with stripping rights from women.

We have all kinds of options to avoid pregnancy. JS.

Well, if they want women to keep their babies, then we'd be better be prepared to expand the welfare state.

ie - Maternity leave for them, government subsidized daycare, more money for education.

Of course, that can't be done on a shoestring. And it takes higher taxes.

Y'know I helped one of my firneds out once, lent him some money so that the mother of his child and his child wouldn't be evicted from their apartment. And in doing so, I think it made all the difference in the child's development.

Occasionally, I see the child, and she looks so happy and well adjusted now because she''s in a good neighborhood with decent services.

But if I hadn't helped them, they would have been kicked out onto the street or forced to move to a bad crime ridden neighborhood - which would have been bad for the child's development.

Point being - when a child comes into the world - they become everybody's responsibility.

Even if they're not your child, you can't turn your back on them.

So people who say they want mothers to keep their babies, but then want cutsin the welfare state or social services, or the worst kind of hypocrites imho.

If we want mothers to keep their babies, then we'd all better be prpeared to help them pay for it.

But these things are all known in advance....prior to a woman becoming pregnant...in most cases they are thought through when the decision is made to have a child with someone. I agree with you....if you want to have a child with someone, you better make damn sure you can care for that child on your own or with your partner. I know shit happens in life, divorces, etc. That shit should be played out as a "what if", too. So should we just stop procreation altogether just because it costs more money? There is no monetary value that should be placed on human life.

Everything I've said can be cited.

Sure. I believe you. I do.

 

[Joe]

...but would you ever consider abortions within the first 2-3 months of pregnancy a legitimate option, Dovey?

No.

But do you wonder WHY... with the squashing of womens sex based rights.....

Actually Dovey, after reading your anti-abortion posts through the years, you have advanced some persuasive arguments that abortion too late in the cycle may not be ideal.

Perhaps there is an argument to discourage abortions when the fetus is too developed & the would be mother comes too late and asks for an abortion.

Like...couldn't they have done it sooner?

That being said, I still think there should be an option for the woman to abort early on or for health reasons.

I wouldn't argue for why it's worse to kill a 5 year old than it is to kill a one year old, Joe.

That's the same exact logic.

That's the same human being. And if it's okay to kill that human at one stage.....its gonna be okay to kill that human at any stage.

Even with all our knowledge and advancements.....we have become more brutal and more lacking in mercy and compassion. People are arguing for fucking infanticide.

This is all pure heartless evil what's being done to human beings. In abortion and now with stripping rights from women.

We have all kinds of options to avoid pregnancy. JS.

Well, if they want women to keep their babies, then we'd be better be prepared to expand the welfare state.

ie - Maternity leave for them, government subsidized daycare, more money for education.

Of course, that can't be done on a shoestring. And it takes higher taxes.

Y'know I helped one of my firneds out once, lent him some money so that the mother of his child and his child wouldn't be evicted from their apartment. And in doing so, I think it made all the difference in the child's development.

Occasionally, I see the child, and she looks so happy and well adjusted now because she''s in a good neighborhood with decent services.

But if I hadn't helped them, they would have been kicked out onto the street or forced to move to a bad crime ridden neighborhood - which would have been bad for the child's development.

Point being - when a child comes into the world - they become everybody's responsibility.

Even if they're not your child, you can't turn your back on them.

So people who say they want mothers to keep their babies, but then want cutsin the welfare state or social services, or the worst kind of hypocrites imho.

If we want mothers to keep their babies, then we'd all better be prpeared to help them pay for it.

But these things are all known in advance....prior to a woman becoming pregnant...in most cases they are thought through when the decision is made to have a child with someone. I agree with you....if you want to have a child with someone, you better make damn sure you can care for that child on your own or with your partner. I know shit happens in life, divorces, etc. That shit should be played out as a "what if", too. So should we just stop procreation altogether just because it costs more money? There is no monetary value that should be placed on human life.

Just saying that if people want to save all these Babies, those same people had better be willing to pay for them whether they are their Kids or not. Once children are born, society can't ignore them. iet - if a mother can't afford to feed her child, people don't wanna see it left by the road to starve and die. It's natural human instinct I hope, to save the child.

So those who advocate saving these children should support increases in social funding to help the mother and child as opposed to budget cutbacks ,

Society can't ignore their needs once the child comes into the world.

 

[Dove]

We can get sterilized.

And yes... .there is always an OB that will do it. AND....if there wasnt? Fight that bullshit. That actually IS a my body my choice circumstance.

I think that's already been tried.

It was used by eugenicists to sterilize 'undersireables' - meaning Black women in places like Alabama during the 1930s

.

Yeah by planned parenthood.

That doesnt mean people shouldnt get sterilized if they dont want children. It's much safer and more humane than killing human beings.

 

[Dove]

...but would you ever consider abortions within the first 2-3 months of pregnancy a legitimate option, Dovey?

No.

But do you wonder WHY... with the squashing of womens sex based rights.....

Actually Dovey, after reading your anti-abortion posts through the years, you have advanced some persuasive arguments that abortion too late in the cycle may not be ideal.

Perhaps there is an argument to discourage abortions when the fetus is too developed & the would be mother comes too late and asks for an abortion.

Like...couldn't they have done it sooner?

That being said, I still think there should be an option for the woman to abort early on or for health reasons.

I wouldn't argue for why it's worse to kill a 5 year old than it is to kill a one year old, Joe.

That's the same exact logic.

That's the same human being. And if it's okay to kill that human at one stage.....its gonna be okay to kill that human at any stage.

Even with all our knowledge and advancements.....we have become more brutal and more lacking in mercy and compassion. People are arguing for fucking infanticide.

This is all pure heartless evil what's being done to human beings. In abortion and now with stripping rights from women.

We have all kinds of options to avoid pregnancy. JS.

Well, if they want women to keep their babies, then we'd be better be prepared to expand the welfare state.

ie - Maternity leave for them, government subsidized daycare, more money for education.

Of course, that can't be done on a shoestring. And it takes higher taxes.

Y'know I helped one of my firneds out once, lent him some money so that the mother of his child and his child wouldn't be evicted from their apartment. And in doing so, I think it made all the difference in the child's development.

Occasionally, I see the child, and she looks so happy and well adjusted now because she''s in a good neighborhood with decent services.

But if I hadn't helped them, they would have been kicked out onto the street or forced to move to a bad crime ridden neighborhood - which would have been bad for the child's development.

Point being - when a child comes into the world - they become everybody's responsibility.

Even if they're not your child, you can't turn your back on them.

So people who say they want mothers to keep their babies, but then want cutsin the welfare state or social services, or the worst kind of hypocrites imho.

If we want mothers to keep their babies, then we'd all better be prpeared to help them pay for it.

But these things are all known in advance....prior to a woman becoming pregnant...in most cases they are thought through when the decision is made to have a child with someone. I agree with you....if you want to have a child with someone, you better make damn sure you can care for that child on your own or with your partner. I know shit happens in life, divorces, etc. That shit should be played out as a "what if", too. So should we just stop procreation altogether just because it costs more money? There is no monetary value that should be placed on human life.

Just saying that if people want to save all these Babies, those same people had better be willing to pay for them whether they are their Kids or not. Once children are born, society can't ignore them. iet - if a mother can't afford to feed her child, people don't wanna see it left by the road to starve and die. It's natural human instinct I hope, to save the child.

So those who advocate saving these children should support increases in social funding to help the mother and child as opposed to budget cutbacks ,

Society can't ignore their needs once the child comes into the world.

Why dont you guys look into everything pro life outreach DOES already? Because it's A LOT and people come out of their own pockets. We could do so much MORE if we had the tax funding fucking abortion gets.

Instead of just repeating this argument over and over. I have said several times .....1. You are not actually obligated to pay someone's bills to defend their human rights. And 2. Pro life outreaches do everything for those who need it.

We also pay into state healthcare programs, as well as things like WIC.

So we already have socail welfare.....that needs much better oversight btw.

Please stop saying no one is doing anything to help women with unplanned pregnancy because EVERYONE does, even MY broke ass does.

There are even more people waiting to adopt than there are babies being aborted and thrown away. So if every woman getting abortion chose adoption, there still wouldnt be enough babies.

I have no idea why you guys continually use this argument when it's not even true and is philosophically barbaric. We dont kill homeless people do we? And if we did I dont have to pay for that person's bills to tell you killing them is wrong do i?