If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
South Dakota Passes Anti Abortion Bill
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
.
0
Comments
The bill states that “to fully protect the rights, interests, and health of the pregnant mother, the rights, interest, and life of her unborn child, and the mother's fundamental natural intrinsic right to a relationship with her child, abortions in South Dakota should be prohibited.”
The argument that this legislation is in part to protect a mother's FUNDAMENTAL NATURAL INTRINSIC (has the point been rammed home yet?) relationship with her unborn child is open to all kinds of conjecture - what if the mother doesn't want a relationship with the child? What if the child is not yet a child? This is just a case of the Theocracy injecting the most pernicious and abhorrent myth of all time, of the so-called maternal instinct, into their legislation. It has no place there. Forcing dirty sluts to love their foetus, whether they like it or not, is fucking wrong.
eta: Good call with The Handmaid's Tale. Along with The Gate to Women's Country should become required reading for all young women.
No wonder people have such a low opinion of America.
tsk tsk tsk.
It really is astonishing how big an issue abortion is to some people.
And they don't have an unreasonable chance of achieveing it.
More despicable and odious people there isn't.
Let the women have a right to choose for themselves. Offer counciling and allow them to be informed of alternatives, but dont take away their rights, in the name of protecting their rights.
Or its just another attempt at legislating Christianity in, like Intelligent Design. Given the culture of life hasnt been a high Republican priority when it comes to smudgy foreigners, I would say this is probably the case.
Not the eventuality of becoming pregnant when it's undesired.
Abortion is morally dodgy, but there isn't much choice.
Is that not the position of some of the Protestant Churches?
It's still illegal down south in Ireland here. One of the few remaining Church influence in State affairs there.
Info from:
http://www.prochoicetexas.org/s09issues/200412231.shtml)
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/sfaa/alabama.html
But so what? Who cares? At state level the majority of states have Republican majority state legislatures. At national level Americans elected a Republican president, a Republican majority House and a Republican majority Senate. If Americans disapprove they’ll stop voting Republican. Admittedly, America is deeply divided between the Republicans and Democrats but since most Americans oppose banning abortion – around 60-65% I believe a ban is unlikely. And even with the Supreme Court leaning in favour of the Republicans Roe v Wade will probably be upheld. (Lets remember too that many Republicans would also oppose banning abortion).
Can't someone now get these fuckers out? What the fuck? How, why?
This takes the piss.
A narrow majority of Americans overall are pro-choice. Although I imagine it varies massively between states – e.g. while most Californians are probably pro-choice I’d guess most folks in Alabama are pro-life.
Legislators have no right to impose moral and religious beliefs on everybody else? Funny – but I bet you supported the ban on fox hunting, clearly an example of moral beliefs being imposed on a section of the population. Or the smoking ban? Some of us think it’s completely immoral to include private members’ clubs and not consider separate areas. What about inciting racial hatred? Most MPs think it’s immoral – hence the law that prohibits it exists. But some neo-Nazis down the road don’t have a problem with it. Yet by banning it certain beliefs are imposed on them – do you oppose the law banning incitement to racial hatred? I didn’t think so – neither do I. Yet aren’t we imposing our values on the minority that disagree therefore?
ETA: Just to elaborate. I'm shocked that a potential life is worth so little to you, that you'd advocate abortion as birth control.
However except in the early stages perhaps we shouldn’t be talking about potential life – as these pictures from the BBC show a baby at 22 weeks ‘capable of fine hand and finger movements’ and scratching, rubbing and patting his cheek is a life.
So, if the condom or pill fails... why shouldn't they?
I mean, think of the terrible life an unwanted child may have. The abuse, the lack of parental care...
Even better, if you're so incapable of having a child, then perhaps you should be thinking about whether you're mature enough to be having sex...
Are you a virgin then I take it? Most sex is for pleasure not procreation.
BBC link.
While I personally oppose abortion I’m not in favour of banning it – although I think there is a strong case for reducing the limit. However – people that say ‘there is nothing human’ being terminated even at the later stages – 24 weeks worry me. I can only assume that you're ignorant. Tbh imo there really isn't much of a moral difference between late abortions and infanticide.
I'm of the opinion that women MUST have the right to choose, and that the law must give that choice their full support.
Abortion is never a substitute for birth control, if a woman wasn't using contraception and then having one abortion after another then I'd agree that it was a disturbing issue. That is highly highly unlikely to actually be the case.
Potential life is hypothetical. It doesn't exist.
But nah, we dont.