Welcome to Until Anti-Choice Bigotry Ends.

Libertarians For Life

http://www.l4l.org/library/abor-rts.html

(via good-gollymissmolly)

This doesn’t even make any sense. An eagle egg may be protected legally but that only stops people from killing the fetus. Nobody is going around watching eagles and making sure that they don’t accidentally or purposely kill their young before they’ve hatched and then condemning them if they do. Abortion is letting a person decide what the best course of action for themselves: pro-choicers do not think that another person terminating a womans pregnancy without her explicit permission should be legal, so this analogy is fucking ridiculous. 

(via opiumdenmother)

So because the mother is doing it to her own child, should we allow mothers who kill their born children do so if she is acting in her own self-interest?

(via good-gollymissmolly)

A born child and a fetus are NOT THE SAME THING. To compare the murder of an autonomous, capable, living, breathing child to a fetus is heinous. If you were to ask a woman who had had an abortion and lost an infant child if she ever thought her child dying was the same as her getting an abortion, can you imagine the response you would get? That is a disgustingly insensitive comparison to make. I did not say that a woman who ‘killed her born child’ was to be excused if a woman getting an abortion should be excused. I said that there is a different between protecting an animal from being hunted and giving a woman the rights to her own fucking body.

(via opiumdenmother)

Well technically a child is not self-sustainable until at least 1.5 years of age, if not older, so they really are the same thing.  And even if they weren’t, they have the capacity to reach being an autonomous being so therefore they are living.  Following your argument, we should also just kill anyone who requires a feeding tube or life support, seeing as they aren’t capable of doing so by themselves.

(via good-gollymissmolly)

Oh for fucks sake. A child is capable of thought and feeling before they are 1.5 years old. And I do not think that any born person should be killed, which you seem unable to understand. Fetus =/= born person. Something having the capacity to do something and actually being able to do it are completely different things. I am not justifying the murder of a person by being pro choice. I am justifying the right for a choice. I find it incredibly sad that you don’t care about giving people a choice but instead believe forcing people to carry and give birth to a child they are not ready to raise or do not want is a better idea. That’s fine. Don’t get a fucking abortion if you don’t like them. But I refuse to be the kind of person prefers the suffering of sentient humans to the terminations of pregnancies. 

(via opiumdenmother)

Your use of rhetoric is so amazingly clever.  You still did not address my concern about those on life support.  

(via good-gollymissmolly)

They are a born person. I clearly stated I do not feel any born person should be killed, thanks.

(via opiumdenmother)

But they don’t have the capacity to choose or survive on their own, so how are they different from an unborn child?  Does passing through the birth canal give you some sort of advantage over everyone else?

(via good-gollymissmolly)

The angle you’re taking is that both abortions and the termination of life support are done with malicious intent. If a woman feels the quality of life her child would have isn’t good enough, she has the right to abort. If a person feels the quality of life their living relative or loved one isn’t what they would have wanted or deserve, maybe they would choose to turn life support off. Nobody sits there thinking ‘this person is a useless vegetable, just kill them’. Just as nobody sits there thinking ‘I’m going to MURDER this fetus because they won’t feel it’. I don’t think women should ever need abortions. I don’t think people should have to be faced with such a difficult decision, but they are, and being against abortion isn’t helping anybody. 

(via opiumdenmother)

I never once claimed abortions are done with malicious intent.  However, I am tired of people telling me that I should think of the mother in this situation.  The mother, regardless of the emotional outcome, will continue to live after the abortion.  That child won’t.  A well-known outcome of heterosexual intercourse is pregnancy.  It is also well-known that there is no form of birth control that is 100% effective.  If you are not willing to deal with those consequences, then do not have sex.  You can argue that you used birth control and that accidents happen, but that does not mean you do not have to deal with the consequences.  That is saying that a person who is driving at night with headlights shouldn’t be prosecuted if he hits a person crossing in a crosswalk.  That wasn’t done with malicious intentions, yet the driver still has to deal with the consequences.  I’m not quite sure how you’re not getting this.

(via good-gollymissmolly)

You should think of the mother in this situation because she is the one that will be the most affected. The fetus can’t feel anything and has no idea what’s going on. The mother is the one that knows that she could lose her job, be kicked out of her house, be unable to provide a stable and loving home for the child, and she completely has a right to decide if she should or should not keep it. Also, by that logic, nobody should ever have sex unless they’re prepared to have a child. If the only reason to have sex was procreation, why the fuck would people do it when they don’t want to get pregnant? Because procreation is not the only reason people have sex. And if you think children are so precious, why do you call them ‘consequences’ that people should have to ‘deal with’?

Libertarians For Life

http://www.l4l.org/library/abor-rts.html

(via good-gollymissmolly)

This doesn’t even make any sense. An eagle egg may be protected legally but that only stops people from killing the fetus. Nobody is going around watching eagles and making sure that they don’t accidentally or purposely kill their young before they’ve hatched and then condemning them if they do. Abortion is letting a person decide what the best course of action for themselves: pro-choicers do not think that another person terminating a womans pregnancy without her explicit permission should be legal, so this analogy is fucking ridiculous. 

(via opiumdenmother)

So because the mother is doing it to her own child, should we allow mothers who kill their born children do so if she is acting in her own self-interest?

(via good-gollymissmolly)

A born child and a fetus are NOT THE SAME THING. To compare the murder of an autonomous, capable, living, breathing child to a fetus is heinous. If you were to ask a woman who had had an abortion and lost an infant child if she ever thought her child dying was the same as her getting an abortion, can you imagine the response you would get? That is a disgustingly insensitive comparison to make. I did not say that a woman who ‘killed her born child’ was to be excused if a woman getting an abortion should be excused. I said that there is a different between protecting an animal from being hunted and giving a woman the rights to her own fucking body.

(via opiumdenmother)

Well technically a child is not self-sustainable until at least 1.5 years of age, if not older, so they really are the same thing.  And even if they weren’t, they have the capacity to reach being an autonomous being so therefore they are living.  Following your argument, we should also just kill anyone who requires a feeding tube or life support, seeing as they aren’t capable of doing so by themselves.

(via good-gollymissmolly)

Oh for fucks sake. A child is capable of thought and feeling before they are 1.5 years old. And I do not think that any born person should be killed, which you seem unable to understand. Fetus =/= born person. Something having the capacity to do something and actually being able to do it are completely different things. I am not justifying the murder of a person by being pro choice. I am justifying the right for a choice. I find it incredibly sad that you don’t care about giving people a choice but instead believe forcing people to carry and give birth to a child they are not ready to raise or do not want is a better idea. That’s fine. Don’t get a fucking abortion if you don’t like them. But I refuse to be the kind of person prefers the suffering of sentient humans to the terminations of pregnancies. 

(via opiumdenmother)

Your use of rhetoric is so amazingly clever.  You still did not address my concern about those on life support.  

(via good-gollymissmolly)

They are a born person. I clearly stated I do not feel any born person should be killed, thanks.

(via opiumdenmother)

But they don’t have the capacity to choose or survive on their own, so how are they different from an unborn child?  Does passing through the birth canal give you some sort of advantage over everyone else?

(via good-gollymissmolly)

The angle you’re taking is that both abortions and the termination of life support are done with malicious intent. If a woman feels the quality of life her child would have isn’t good enough, she has the right to abort. If a person feels the quality of life their living relative or loved one isn’t what they would have wanted or deserve, maybe they would choose to turn life support off. Nobody sits there thinking ‘this person is a useless vegetable, just kill them’. Just as nobody sits there thinking ‘I’m going to MURDER this fetus because they won’t feel it’. I don’t think women should ever need abortions. I don’t think people should have to be faced with such a difficult decision, but they are, and being against abortion isn’t helping anybody. 

Libertarians For Life

http://www.l4l.org/library/abor-rts.html

(via good-gollymissmolly)

This doesn’t even make any sense. An eagle egg may be protected legally but that only stops people from killing the fetus. Nobody is going around watching eagles and making sure that they don’t accidentally or purposely kill their young before they’ve hatched and then condemning them if they do. Abortion is letting a person decide what the best course of action for themselves: pro-choicers do not think that another person terminating a womans pregnancy without her explicit permission should be legal, so this analogy is fucking ridiculous. 

(via opiumdenmother)

So because the mother is doing it to her own child, should we allow mothers who kill their born children do so if she is acting in her own self-interest?

(via good-gollymissmolly)

A born child and a fetus are NOT THE SAME THING. To compare the murder of an autonomous, capable, living, breathing child to a fetus is heinous. If you were to ask a woman who had had an abortion and lost an infant child if she ever thought her child dying was the same as her getting an abortion, can you imagine the response you would get? That is a disgustingly insensitive comparison to make. I did not say that a woman who ‘killed her born child’ was to be excused if a woman getting an abortion should be excused. I said that there is a different between protecting an animal from being hunted and giving a woman the rights to her own fucking body.

(via opiumdenmother)

Well technically a child is not self-sustainable until at least 1.5 years of age, if not older, so they really are the same thing.  And even if they weren’t, they have the capacity to reach being an autonomous being so therefore they are living.  Following your argument, we should also just kill anyone who requires a feeding tube or life support, seeing as they aren’t capable of doing so by themselves.

(via good-gollymissmolly)

Oh for fucks sake. A child is capable of thought and feeling before they are 1.5 years old. And I do not think that any born person should be killed, which you seem unable to understand. Fetus =/= born person. Something having the capacity to do something and actually being able to do it are completely different things. I am not justifying the murder of a person by being pro choice. I am justifying the right for a choice. I find it incredibly sad that you don’t care about giving people a choice but instead believe forcing people to carry and give birth to a child they are not ready to raise or do not want is a better idea. That’s fine. Don’t get a fucking abortion if you don’t like them. But I refuse to be the kind of person prefers the suffering of sentient humans to the terminations of pregnancies. 

Libertarians For Life

http://www.l4l.org/library/abor-rts.html

(via good-gollymissmolly)

This doesn’t even make any sense. An eagle egg may be protected legally but that only stops people from killing the fetus. Nobody is going around watching eagles and making sure that they don’t accidentally or purposely kill their young before they’ve hatched and then condemning them if they do. Abortion is letting a person decide what the best course of action for themselves: pro-choicers do not think that another person terminating a womans pregnancy without her explicit permission should be legal, so this analogy is fucking ridiculous. 

(via opiumdenmother)

So because the mother is doing it to her own child, should we allow mothers who kill their born children do so if she is acting in her own self-interest?

(via good-gollymissmolly)

A born child and a fetus are NOT THE SAME THING. To compare the murder of an autonomous, capable, living, breathing child to a fetus is heinous. If you were to ask a woman who had had an abortion and lost an infant child if she ever thought her child dying was the same as her getting an abortion, can you imagine the response you would get? That is a disgustingly insensitive comparison to make. I did not say that a woman who ‘killed her born child’ was to be excused if a woman getting an abortion should be excused. I said that there is a different between protecting an animal from being hunted and giving a woman the rights to her own fucking body.

Libertarians For Life

http://www.l4l.org/library/abor-rts.html

(via good-gollymissmolly)

This doesn’t even make any sense. An eagle egg may be protected legally but that only stops people from killing the fetus. Nobody is going around watching eagles and making sure that they don’t accidentally or purposely kill their young before they’ve hatched and then condemning them if they do. Abortion is letting a person decide what the best course of action for themselves: pro-choicers do not think that another person terminating a womans pregnancy without her explicit permission should be legal, so this analogy is fucking ridiculous.