Right after Roe fell we had to listen to so many of these assholes hand wave away our concern with "this doesn't BAN abortion! It just leaves it up to the states! States still get to decide, so it's fine."

🤷‍♀️

.

this isn’t only about abortion rights but the criminalization of drug use & addiction as well. this person was drug-tested without her permission, was found to have meth in her system. 

despite having no evidence that drug use caused the stillbirth, and the fact that california law doesn’t criminalize stillbirth even if drugs are involved, she was interrogated by the police about her drug use and charged for the murder of her dead son. the same district attorney that prosecuted her had earlier went after someone else for stillbirth with alleged meth usage. both women spent over a year (as many as 4) behind bars before the cases were dismissed.

if we’re going to fight for abortion rights, we need to fight for the rights of drug users and addicts as well. they used this woman’s addiction to try and force punishment on her for a death that was not her fault. as long as the attitude the general public has on addicts continues, this will continue to happen as well, even if abortion is protected.

Yes, and as often with anti-addict bigotry, there’s a racial component too. I highly recommend the You’re Wrong About episode ‘crack babies’, which explains in great detail how the persecution of mothers based on accusations of drug use is just another blatantly racist way in which the war on drugs incarcerates mainly black people. https://www.stitcher.com/show/youre-wrong-about/episode/crack-babies-54339142

Panels 1 - 10

I found this on twitter by user Kingfisher & Wombat. https://twitter.com/UrsulaV/status/1568685612168892423?cxt=HHwWjsC-2ZjQi8UrAAAA Thought it was too good not to share. First comic in quite a while that’s got me in tears, ‘cos it felt like hope, and, well, what with everything…

Of course, it’s from @ursula-vernon. I should have recognized.

Thank you.

Thoughts on being pro-life

If I had to choose, I would easily be more of a “liberal” than a “conservative”

This is because I want to see many changes that liberals also want

But there is a huge contention between me and liberals

And as a result, it may be the only thing about be that could be called “conservative”

I deeply believe the medical practice of induced abortion is morally reprehensible

I don’t believe it is a right anyone has, nor do I believe it should be legal

For this reason, I can be called “pro-life”

I accept this label, but with this acceptance I have something else to say

Many people who consider themselves “pro-life” are not consistent

I believe it is inconsistent to be against abortion, but in favor of instigating war

In favor of killing non-human animals

In favor of executing criminals

These are all terrible things that are not pro-life, but anti-life

In yet, many pro-life conservatives seem all too willing to go to war, to hunt and eat animals, and to execute criminals

I ask that these conservatives consider their values deeper

I ask that they hold on tighter to their reverence of life, retaining it for the unborn but also expanding it for foreign peoples, other animals, and even heinous criminals

Life is precious

I believe that being pro-life is the most moral position to take on the abortion debate

And having said that, I believe that being vegan, against instigation of war, and against capital punishment would also be the more moral positions in their respective debates, and that they are entirely consistent with being pro-life

And as for the liberals

Liberals seem to be very passionate about ending discrimination

Discrimination is something that must end, I will join them in that conviction

But tell me, what is discrimination if not drawing arbitrary lines about who receives what consideration?

Is it not discriminatory to classify a fetus, not as an unborn he, she, or they but as an “it”?

An “it” that we are entitled to destroy whenever we please?

Being pro-life shouldn’t be seen as a liberal or conservative issue

It is a moral issue

A question of consideration and rights

And I do not believe that anyone for reason of race, sex, or age should be killed

This is not an anti-woman position

This is an anti-killing position

Please

Leave the unborn alone

And while we’re at it

Leave women alone, leave minorities alone, leave foreigners alone, leave other animals alone

For the love of all that is good

Please

Stop oppression

Stop violence

Hi. This seems very sincere and from a very well intentioned place. It also, however, comes across as very niave and uninformed. I don’t say that to be mean or insulting, only to specify that while I believe your heart is in the right place, you don’t have the facts of the situation. This post is going to be lengthy, but only because I believe you deserve a chance to understand.

The simple truth is that restrictions on abortion are, by definition, *not* leaving women and minorities alone. Abortion restrictions, by their very nature, are an attack on the safety and legal standing of anyone who can get pregnant.

The disconnect you’re having here is that you aren’t stopping to consider *why* abortion is the choice some people make, and what harm happens when that choice is taken away. You aren’t thinking about the ways in which abortion is harm reduction, or the ways in which its access protects people who have the ability to become pregnant from some very very serious abuse and exploitation.

The ability to become pregnant makes us uniquely vulnerable. It means that an act of violence against us, an unlucky experience with some contraceptives, or even a wanted pregnancy that is medically unviable can instantly endanger our physical, emotional, mental, and financial safety. The ways in which an unplanned pregnancy can trap people in unsafe situations or inhibit their ability stay safe.

There are many situations where a person who is already in a bad situation becoming pregnant can make that situation much much worse- even deadly. Homicide (often by an intimate partner) is the number 1 cause of death for pregnant people in the United States after all. If you’re in an abusive relationship, an unplanned pregnancy can make leaving far riskier and more logistically complicated. It can increase the frequency or intensity of that abuse. If you are assaulted, the person who assaulted you *doesnt* automatically lose parental rights to any resulting child- even if that puts you at continued risk of abuse.

Pregnancy can trigger extreme dysphoria and other mental health issues for folks. It can trigger serious physical health issues. It can mean you aren’t supposed to continue the use the prescribed medications for serious health conditions. (We’ve already seen cases of people being taken to court over miscarriages because of medication they had been taking.) We have seen people be told their chemotherapy has to be delayed because of a pregnancy- decisions that killed those people.

Abortion bans, even with exceptions for the health of the pregnant person, slows care for people who are experiencing pregnancy loss. We are already seeing horrific cases of medical neglect here in Texas as hospitals tell people going through miscarriages that they have to *wait* until they are *more sick* to get treatment- closer to sepsis, closer to permanent infertility or disability, closer to death themselves- before they can recieve care because legally its that grey area.

And fundamentally, restrictions on abortion are an attack on our personhood under the law. They say that if you become pregnant, your body, your organs, your blood and bones- they are no longer yours as long as that pregnancy is happening. This fundamental legal fact is imposed on no one else in our society. In no other situation is another person (and I’m fine saying that a fetus is legally a person) entitled to use your organs against your will.

To be clear, the argument here isn’t “its OK to kill a fetus because of its age.” The argument is that “no person, regardless of age, is entitled to the physical organs of another without consent, even if withholding or withdrawing access to that other person’s body will lead to their death.” It’s “unwanted pregnancy can fall into the realm of self defense, and a person is legally allowed to protect themselves from harm with potentially deadly means if necessary.” It’s “there are very good and legitimate reasons for abortion sometimes but the only people who should be able to make that call are the pregnant person with the consultation of their doctor.” It’s “pregnancy and abortion are deeply intimate issues and the choice to carry or abort a pregnancy should not be left up to Ted Cruz.”

Reread your own post. Notice how nowhere in it do you mention the people who are actually pregnant when talking about consideration and rights. Think about who you are and aren’t thinking about here.

Look, I understand. It’s sad that the fetus dies. I’m not asking you to celebrate that. But the way to actually help is to champion causes that EXPAND options for people, that give people more choices so that fewer choose abortion. Because taking options away will only ever hurt people. Champion socialized health care and guaranteed paid parental leave, subsidized prenatal care and child care, expanded protections for domestic abuse and sexual assault survivors, easier affordable access to contraceptives and plan b. Those things- which consider what circumstances can make abortion the choice people chose and providing support- are going to do far far far more good in the world than abortion bans ever could. Abortion bans are not just a less good option, they are actively harmful and hostile to those who can get pregnant.

I want you to consider the ways in which prioritizing the beginning of life over living people’s quality of life can and does cause harm. That prioritizing getting a fetus to term over the health and safety of already living people can and does cause suffering. It’s a quantity of life over a quality of life mindset that ignores and causes suffering and pain. And I would argue that it is a moral evil to say “it’s good to make people suffer if that suffering leads to more people being born.”

Never forget that forced pregnancy is considered a crime against humanity by the UN. Think about why.

Again, I don’t think you are a bad person or an evil person for what you have said here. But I do think your lack of nuance and awareness on this topic is causing you to support legislation and politicians that is hurting a lot of people.

@attemptatthought just use reblogs. Replies are like the worst way to have a conversation on this site. Just use reblogs.

And I will *always* talk about extreme cases, because you never know what an individual person’s situation is. You don’t know why someone might chose abortion. You aren’t privy to that.

And if you write and support legislation that *ignores* extreme situations, then you will directly cause the suffering of those people.

For a lot of people, an unwanted pregnancy is not a temporary burden. It can be a death sentence. And if you don’t consider those people, then you get situations like what we have here in Texas. And it’s not good. It is causing suffering and harm and death.

The only person who can truly truly say how extreme an individuals situation is, how dangerous or how devastating- is the person who is pregnant themselves (with some medical input from a doctor perhaps.)

Again, I think it’s a moral evil to say that we should cause human suffering because it leads to more births. I think that is a morally repugnant way to approach basically any situation.

It’s also helpful to look around at who your allies are in this fight. Because while a lot of prolifers are like you- well intentioned but niave - many are also violent misogynists who resent women’s lib and feminism and want to turn pregnancy into a vulnerability again. A weapon with which we can be harmed and disenfranchised. They resent that our ability to become pregnant no longer kept us in the home, and their legislation will seek to chain us back there.

If you recognize that SOMETIMES there are justifiable reasons to get an abortion, and you realize that you aren’t omnipotent and can’t know the details of anyone’s life, then it logically and morally makes sense to support legal abortion access.

@fandomsandfeminism thanks for your advice. I’m not very tech savvy. I don’t think we should have laws that ignore extreme situations. I also don’t think we should have laws that treat all situations equally. Perhaps some abortion is negotiable in terms of being legal. That being said I think most abortion should not be legal because they are not the extreme cases people mention.

But that’s the thing- there isn’t a way to legislate like that. When we try, people still suffer.

Again, look at Texas.

This is what “medical exceptions” look like- people sent home with a dying fetus inside them, told to wait until they are sick enough for care. Told to wait until that miscarriage becomes septic so that it’s justifiable under the law.

What if you have an exception because of rape- how do you prove you qualify? Rape trials, notoriously hard to get to court, take months.

What if you have an exception for a domestic abuse situation? How do you prove that? How long would it take? Would it not open you up to more abuse when you seek that exception?

What if you have an exemption because of mental health risks? How do you prove your need is great enough? How do you prove that you mean it? That it’s bad enough to count?

You can’t.

You can’t legislate this.

You just need to *trust* that the people who are choosing abortion have a good reason. Trust that they aren’t monsters. They aren’t evil. They are just people who know their circumstances better than you or I or Joe Biden or Ted Cruz ever could. That’s how you make sure that only the people who need abortions get them- trust the people who are in the situation, and fight to give them as many options as possible.

Anything less will hurt people. Will kill people.

I’m sorry but I just don’t think this is accurate. Is it possible that someone people would be unconvinced of something like danger to the life of the mother? Perhaps. But they shouldn’t have any involvement in that. If a doctor says the pregnant person will die, I’m betting the doctor is correct. Though investigating for appealed exceptions seems like it could be done in a reasonable way, for the exceptions that should if any be made I don’t think their would be an investigation. Just a physical examination by a professional.

Did you read the article? Because it’s right there in the article. Like it’s happening now. this is a real thing that is happening right now in Texas.

I’m sorry that you think it shouldn’t be happening. But it is happening. This is what happens when you try to legislate exceptions. People fall through the cracks and people suffer. If you think that there are sometimes justifiable reasons to have abortion then the only Reasonable and moral thing to do is to support abortion access. Because any restrictions that you put on abortion access is going to hurt people

I didn’t read the article because I don’t think it is entirely relevant to I myself am saying and what I myself want. I trust you when you say there are laws that are going crazy about this. But I disagree if you imply that means we simply cannot regulate it all. I think there is a right way to do this. The fact that it is not being done at the present does not make it impossible.

And I’m telling you that restrictions, by definition, put barriers between people and the care they *know* they need.

The problem is that right now you refuse to trust the people in these situations to make their own choices. Think about why.

And that's your problem. You don't trust people who can become pregnant to make choices about their bodies, their health, their life. You view them as being irresponsible. Too irresponsible, apparently, to know what should and shouldn't happen to their own bodies.

And that mindset directly leads to harm and suffering. You're OK with those people suffering because you think they are too irresponsible to make the choice you personally would make.

And all the people who you DO think have justifiable situations for an abortion will suffer too. Some of them will die over it.

That's what you need to reflect on.

Thoughts on being pro-life

If I had to choose, I would easily be more of a “liberal” than a “conservative”

This is because I want to see many changes that liberals also want

But there is a huge contention between me and liberals

And as a result, it may be the only thing about be that could be called “conservative”

I deeply believe the medical practice of induced abortion is morally reprehensible

I don’t believe it is a right anyone has, nor do I believe it should be legal

For this reason, I can be called “pro-life”

I accept this label, but with this acceptance I have something else to say

Many people who consider themselves “pro-life” are not consistent

I believe it is inconsistent to be against abortion, but in favor of instigating war

In favor of killing non-human animals

In favor of executing criminals

These are all terrible things that are not pro-life, but anti-life

In yet, many pro-life conservatives seem all too willing to go to war, to hunt and eat animals, and to execute criminals

I ask that these conservatives consider their values deeper

I ask that they hold on tighter to their reverence of life, retaining it for the unborn but also expanding it for foreign peoples, other animals, and even heinous criminals

Life is precious

I believe that being pro-life is the most moral position to take on the abortion debate

And having said that, I believe that being vegan, against instigation of war, and against capital punishment would also be the more moral positions in their respective debates, and that they are entirely consistent with being pro-life

And as for the liberals

Liberals seem to be very passionate about ending discrimination

Discrimination is something that must end, I will join them in that conviction

But tell me, what is discrimination if not drawing arbitrary lines about who receives what consideration?

Is it not discriminatory to classify a fetus, not as an unborn he, she, or they but as an “it”?

An “it” that we are entitled to destroy whenever we please?

Being pro-life shouldn’t be seen as a liberal or conservative issue

It is a moral issue

A question of consideration and rights

And I do not believe that anyone for reason of race, sex, or age should be killed

This is not an anti-woman position

This is an anti-killing position

Please

Leave the unborn alone

And while we’re at it

Leave women alone, leave minorities alone, leave foreigners alone, leave other animals alone

For the love of all that is good

Please

Stop oppression

Stop violence

Hi. This seems very sincere and from a very well intentioned place. It also, however, comes across as very niave and uninformed. I don’t say that to be mean or insulting, only to specify that while I believe your heart is in the right place, you don’t have the facts of the situation. This post is going to be lengthy, but only because I believe you deserve a chance to understand.

The simple truth is that restrictions on abortion are, by definition, *not* leaving women and minorities alone. Abortion restrictions, by their very nature, are an attack on the safety and legal standing of anyone who can get pregnant.

The disconnect you’re having here is that you aren’t stopping to consider *why* abortion is the choice some people make, and what harm happens when that choice is taken away. You aren’t thinking about the ways in which abortion is harm reduction, or the ways in which its access protects people who have the ability to become pregnant from some very very serious abuse and exploitation.

The ability to become pregnant makes us uniquely vulnerable. It means that an act of violence against us, an unlucky experience with some contraceptives, or even a wanted pregnancy that is medically unviable can instantly endanger our physical, emotional, mental, and financial safety. The ways in which an unplanned pregnancy can trap people in unsafe situations or inhibit their ability stay safe.

There are many situations where a person who is already in a bad situation becoming pregnant can make that situation much much worse- even deadly. Homicide (often by an intimate partner) is the number 1 cause of death for pregnant people in the United States after all. If you’re in an abusive relationship, an unplanned pregnancy can make leaving far riskier and more logistically complicated. It can increase the frequency or intensity of that abuse. If you are assaulted, the person who assaulted you *doesnt* automatically lose parental rights to any resulting child- even if that puts you at continued risk of abuse.

Pregnancy can trigger extreme dysphoria and other mental health issues for folks. It can trigger serious physical health issues. It can mean you aren’t supposed to continue the use the prescribed medications for serious health conditions. (We’ve already seen cases of people being taken to court over miscarriages because of medication they had been taking.) We have seen people be told their chemotherapy has to be delayed because of a pregnancy- decisions that killed those people.

Abortion bans, even with exceptions for the health of the pregnant person, slows care for people who are experiencing pregnancy loss. We are already seeing horrific cases of medical neglect here in Texas as hospitals tell people going through miscarriages that they have to *wait* until they are *more sick* to get treatment- closer to sepsis, closer to permanent infertility or disability, closer to death themselves- before they can recieve care because legally its that grey area.

And fundamentally, restrictions on abortion are an attack on our personhood under the law. They say that if you become pregnant, your body, your organs, your blood and bones- they are no longer yours as long as that pregnancy is happening. This fundamental legal fact is imposed on no one else in our society. In no other situation is another person (and I’m fine saying that a fetus is legally a person) entitled to use your organs against your will.

To be clear, the argument here isn’t “its OK to kill a fetus because of its age.” The argument is that “no person, regardless of age, is entitled to the physical organs of another without consent, even if withholding or withdrawing access to that other person’s body will lead to their death.” It’s “unwanted pregnancy can fall into the realm of self defense, and a person is legally allowed to protect themselves from harm with potentially deadly means if necessary.” It’s “there are very good and legitimate reasons for abortion sometimes but the only people who should be able to make that call are the pregnant person with the consultation of their doctor.” It’s “pregnancy and abortion are deeply intimate issues and the choice to carry or abort a pregnancy should not be left up to Ted Cruz.”

Reread your own post. Notice how nowhere in it do you mention the people who are actually pregnant when talking about consideration and rights. Think about who you are and aren’t thinking about here.

Look, I understand. It’s sad that the fetus dies. I’m not asking you to celebrate that. But the way to actually help is to champion causes that EXPAND options for people, that give people more choices so that fewer choose abortion. Because taking options away will only ever hurt people. Champion socialized health care and guaranteed paid parental leave, subsidized prenatal care and child care, expanded protections for domestic abuse and sexual assault survivors, easier affordable access to contraceptives and plan b. Those things- which consider what circumstances can make abortion the choice people chose and providing support- are going to do far far far more good in the world than abortion bans ever could. Abortion bans are not just a less good option, they are actively harmful and hostile to those who can get pregnant.

I want you to consider the ways in which prioritizing the beginning of life over living people’s quality of life can and does cause harm. That prioritizing getting a fetus to term over the health and safety of already living people can and does cause suffering. It’s a quantity of life over a quality of life mindset that ignores and causes suffering and pain. And I would argue that it is a moral evil to say “it’s good to make people suffer if that suffering leads to more people being born.”

Never forget that forced pregnancy is considered a crime against humanity by the UN. Think about why.

Again, I don’t think you are a bad person or an evil person for what you have said here. But I do think your lack of nuance and awareness on this topic is causing you to support legislation and politicians that is hurting a lot of people.

@attemptatthought just use reblogs. Replies are like the worst way to have a conversation on this site. Just use reblogs.

And I will *always* talk about extreme cases, because you never know what an individual person’s situation is. You don’t know why someone might chose abortion. You aren’t privy to that.

And if you write and support legislation that *ignores* extreme situations, then you will directly cause the suffering of those people.

For a lot of people, an unwanted pregnancy is not a temporary burden. It can be a death sentence. And if you don’t consider those people, then you get situations like what we have here in Texas. And it’s not good. It is causing suffering and harm and death.

The only person who can truly truly say how extreme an individuals situation is, how dangerous or how devastating- is the person who is pregnant themselves (with some medical input from a doctor perhaps.)

Again, I think it’s a moral evil to say that we should cause human suffering because it leads to more births. I think that is a morally repugnant way to approach basically any situation.

It’s also helpful to look around at who your allies are in this fight. Because while a lot of prolifers are like you- well intentioned but niave - many are also violent misogynists who resent women’s lib and feminism and want to turn pregnancy into a vulnerability again. A weapon with which we can be harmed and disenfranchised. They resent that our ability to become pregnant no longer kept us in the home, and their legislation will seek to chain us back there.

If you recognize that SOMETIMES there are justifiable reasons to get an abortion, and you realize that you aren’t omnipotent and can’t know the details of anyone’s life, then it logically and morally makes sense to support legal abortion access.

@fandomsandfeminism thanks for your advice. I’m not very tech savvy. I don’t think we should have laws that ignore extreme situations. I also don’t think we should have laws that treat all situations equally. Perhaps some abortion is negotiable in terms of being legal. That being said I think most abortion should not be legal because they are not the extreme cases people mention.

But that’s the thing- there isn’t a way to legislate like that. When we try, people still suffer.

Again, look at Texas.

This is what “medical exceptions” look like- people sent home with a dying fetus inside them, told to wait until they are sick enough for care. Told to wait until that miscarriage becomes septic so that it’s justifiable under the law.

What if you have an exception because of rape- how do you prove you qualify? Rape trials, notoriously hard to get to court, take months.

What if you have an exception for a domestic abuse situation? How do you prove that? How long would it take? Would it not open you up to more abuse when you seek that exception?

What if you have an exemption because of mental health risks? How do you prove your need is great enough? How do you prove that you mean it? That it’s bad enough to count?

You can’t.

You can’t legislate this.

You just need to *trust* that the people who are choosing abortion have a good reason. Trust that they aren’t monsters. They aren’t evil. They are just people who know their circumstances better than you or I or Joe Biden or Ted Cruz ever could. That’s how you make sure that only the people who need abortions get them- trust the people who are in the situation, and fight to give them as many options as possible.

Anything less will hurt people. Will kill people.

I’m sorry but I just don’t think this is accurate. Is it possible that someone people would be unconvinced of something like danger to the life of the mother? Perhaps. But they shouldn’t have any involvement in that. If a doctor says the pregnant person will die, I’m betting the doctor is correct. Though investigating for appealed exceptions seems like it could be done in a reasonable way, for the exceptions that should if any be made I don’t think their would be an investigation. Just a physical examination by a professional.

Did you read the article? Because it’s right there in the article. Like it’s happening now. this is a real thing that is happening right now in Texas.

I’m sorry that you think it shouldn’t be happening. But it is happening. This is what happens when you try to legislate exceptions. People fall through the cracks and people suffer. If you think that there are sometimes justifiable reasons to have abortion then the only Reasonable and moral thing to do is to support abortion access. Because any restrictions that you put on abortion access is going to hurt people

I didn’t read the article because I don’t think it is entirely relevant to I myself am saying and what I myself want. I trust you when you say there are laws that are going crazy about this. But I disagree if you imply that means we simply cannot regulate it all. I think there is a right way to do this. The fact that it is not being done at the present does not make it impossible.

And I'm telling you that restrictions, by definition, put barriers between people and the care they *know* they need.

The problem is that right now you refuse to trust the people in these situations to make their own choices. Think about why.

Thoughts on being pro-life

If I had to choose, I would easily be more of a “liberal” than a “conservative”

This is because I want to see many changes that liberals also want

But there is a huge contention between me and liberals

And as a result, it may be the only thing about be that could be called “conservative”

I deeply believe the medical practice of induced abortion is morally reprehensible

I don’t believe it is a right anyone has, nor do I believe it should be legal

For this reason, I can be called “pro-life”

I accept this label, but with this acceptance I have something else to say

Many people who consider themselves “pro-life” are not consistent

I believe it is inconsistent to be against abortion, but in favor of instigating war

In favor of killing non-human animals

In favor of executing criminals

These are all terrible things that are not pro-life, but anti-life

In yet, many pro-life conservatives seem all too willing to go to war, to hunt and eat animals, and to execute criminals

I ask that these conservatives consider their values deeper

I ask that they hold on tighter to their reverence of life, retaining it for the unborn but also expanding it for foreign peoples, other animals, and even heinous criminals

Life is precious

I believe that being pro-life is the most moral position to take on the abortion debate

And having said that, I believe that being vegan, against instigation of war, and against capital punishment would also be the more moral positions in their respective debates, and that they are entirely consistent with being pro-life

And as for the liberals

Liberals seem to be very passionate about ending discrimination

Discrimination is something that must end, I will join them in that conviction

But tell me, what is discrimination if not drawing arbitrary lines about who receives what consideration?

Is it not discriminatory to classify a fetus, not as an unborn he, she, or they but as an “it”?

An “it” that we are entitled to destroy whenever we please?

Being pro-life shouldn’t be seen as a liberal or conservative issue

It is a moral issue

A question of consideration and rights

And I do not believe that anyone for reason of race, sex, or age should be killed

This is not an anti-woman position

This is an anti-killing position

Please

Leave the unborn alone

And while we’re at it

Leave women alone, leave minorities alone, leave foreigners alone, leave other animals alone

For the love of all that is good

Please

Stop oppression

Stop violence

Hi. This seems very sincere and from a very well intentioned place. It also, however, comes across as very niave and uninformed. I don’t say that to be mean or insulting, only to specify that while I believe your heart is in the right place, you don’t have the facts of the situation. This post is going to be lengthy, but only because I believe you deserve a chance to understand.

The simple truth is that restrictions on abortion are, by definition, *not* leaving women and minorities alone. Abortion restrictions, by their very nature, are an attack on the safety and legal standing of anyone who can get pregnant.

The disconnect you’re having here is that you aren’t stopping to consider *why* abortion is the choice some people make, and what harm happens when that choice is taken away. You aren’t thinking about the ways in which abortion is harm reduction, or the ways in which its access protects people who have the ability to become pregnant from some very very serious abuse and exploitation.

The ability to become pregnant makes us uniquely vulnerable. It means that an act of violence against us, an unlucky experience with some contraceptives, or even a wanted pregnancy that is medically unviable can instantly endanger our physical, emotional, mental, and financial safety. The ways in which an unplanned pregnancy can trap people in unsafe situations or inhibit their ability stay safe.

There are many situations where a person who is already in a bad situation becoming pregnant can make that situation much much worse- even deadly. Homicide (often by an intimate partner) is the number 1 cause of death for pregnant people in the United States after all. If you’re in an abusive relationship, an unplanned pregnancy can make leaving far riskier and more logistically complicated. It can increase the frequency or intensity of that abuse. If you are assaulted, the person who assaulted you *doesnt* automatically lose parental rights to any resulting child- even if that puts you at continued risk of abuse.

Pregnancy can trigger extreme dysphoria and other mental health issues for folks. It can trigger serious physical health issues. It can mean you aren’t supposed to continue the use the prescribed medications for serious health conditions. (We’ve already seen cases of people being taken to court over miscarriages because of medication they had been taking.) We have seen people be told their chemotherapy has to be delayed because of a pregnancy- decisions that killed those people.

Abortion bans, even with exceptions for the health of the pregnant person, slows care for people who are experiencing pregnancy loss. We are already seeing horrific cases of medical neglect here in Texas as hospitals tell people going through miscarriages that they have to *wait* until they are *more sick* to get treatment- closer to sepsis, closer to permanent infertility or disability, closer to death themselves- before they can recieve care because legally its that grey area.

And fundamentally, restrictions on abortion are an attack on our personhood under the law. They say that if you become pregnant, your body, your organs, your blood and bones- they are no longer yours as long as that pregnancy is happening. This fundamental legal fact is imposed on no one else in our society. In no other situation is another person (and I’m fine saying that a fetus is legally a person) entitled to use your organs against your will.

To be clear, the argument here isn’t “its OK to kill a fetus because of its age.” The argument is that “no person, regardless of age, is entitled to the physical organs of another without consent, even if withholding or withdrawing access to that other person’s body will lead to their death.” It’s “unwanted pregnancy can fall into the realm of self defense, and a person is legally allowed to protect themselves from harm with potentially deadly means if necessary.” It’s “there are very good and legitimate reasons for abortion sometimes but the only people who should be able to make that call are the pregnant person with the consultation of their doctor.” It’s “pregnancy and abortion are deeply intimate issues and the choice to carry or abort a pregnancy should not be left up to Ted Cruz.”

Reread your own post. Notice how nowhere in it do you mention the people who are actually pregnant when talking about consideration and rights. Think about who you are and aren’t thinking about here.

Look, I understand. It’s sad that the fetus dies. I’m not asking you to celebrate that. But the way to actually help is to champion causes that EXPAND options for people, that give people more choices so that fewer choose abortion. Because taking options away will only ever hurt people. Champion socialized health care and guaranteed paid parental leave, subsidized prenatal care and child care, expanded protections for domestic abuse and sexual assault survivors, easier affordable access to contraceptives and plan b. Those things- which consider what circumstances can make abortion the choice people chose and providing support- are going to do far far far more good in the world than abortion bans ever could. Abortion bans are not just a less good option, they are actively harmful and hostile to those who can get pregnant.

I want you to consider the ways in which prioritizing the beginning of life over living people’s quality of life can and does cause harm. That prioritizing getting a fetus to term over the health and safety of already living people can and does cause suffering. It’s a quantity of life over a quality of life mindset that ignores and causes suffering and pain. And I would argue that it is a moral evil to say “it’s good to make people suffer if that suffering leads to more people being born.”

Never forget that forced pregnancy is considered a crime against humanity by the UN. Think about why.

Again, I don’t think you are a bad person or an evil person for what you have said here. But I do think your lack of nuance and awareness on this topic is causing you to support legislation and politicians that is hurting a lot of people.

@attemptatthought just use reblogs. Replies are like the worst way to have a conversation on this site. Just use reblogs.

And I will *always* talk about extreme cases, because you never know what an individual person’s situation is. You don’t know why someone might chose abortion. You aren’t privy to that.

And if you write and support legislation that *ignores* extreme situations, then you will directly cause the suffering of those people.

For a lot of people, an unwanted pregnancy is not a temporary burden. It can be a death sentence. And if you don’t consider those people, then you get situations like what we have here in Texas. And it’s not good. It is causing suffering and harm and death.

The only person who can truly truly say how extreme an individuals situation is, how dangerous or how devastating- is the person who is pregnant themselves (with some medical input from a doctor perhaps.)

Again, I think it’s a moral evil to say that we should cause human suffering because it leads to more births. I think that is a morally repugnant way to approach basically any situation.

It’s also helpful to look around at who your allies are in this fight. Because while a lot of prolifers are like you- well intentioned but niave - many are also violent misogynists who resent women’s lib and feminism and want to turn pregnancy into a vulnerability again. A weapon with which we can be harmed and disenfranchised. They resent that our ability to become pregnant no longer kept us in the home, and their legislation will seek to chain us back there.

If you recognize that SOMETIMES there are justifiable reasons to get an abortion, and you realize that you aren’t omnipotent and can’t know the details of anyone’s life, then it logically and morally makes sense to support legal abortion access.

@fandomsandfeminism thanks for your advice. I’m not very tech savvy. I don’t think we should have laws that ignore extreme situations. I also don’t think we should have laws that treat all situations equally. Perhaps some abortion is negotiable in terms of being legal. That being said I think most abortion should not be legal because they are not the extreme cases people mention.

But that’s the thing- there isn’t a way to legislate like that. When we try, people still suffer.

Again, look at Texas.

This is what “medical exceptions” look like- people sent home with a dying fetus inside them, told to wait until they are sick enough for care. Told to wait until that miscarriage becomes septic so that it’s justifiable under the law.

What if you have an exception because of rape- how do you prove you qualify? Rape trials, notoriously hard to get to court, take months.

What if you have an exception for a domestic abuse situation? How do you prove that? How long would it take? Would it not open you up to more abuse when you seek that exception?

What if you have an exemption because of mental health risks? How do you prove your need is great enough? How do you prove that you mean it? That it’s bad enough to count?

You can’t.

You can’t legislate this.

You just need to *trust* that the people who are choosing abortion have a good reason. Trust that they aren’t monsters. They aren’t evil. They are just people who know their circumstances better than you or I or Joe Biden or Ted Cruz ever could. That’s how you make sure that only the people who need abortions get them- trust the people who are in the situation, and fight to give them as many options as possible.

Anything less will hurt people. Will kill people.

I’m sorry but I just don’t think this is accurate. Is it possible that someone people would be unconvinced of something like danger to the life of the mother? Perhaps. But they shouldn’t have any involvement in that. If a doctor says the pregnant person will die, I’m betting the doctor is correct. Though investigating for appealed exceptions seems like it could be done in a reasonable way, for the exceptions that should if any be made I don’t think their would be an investigation. Just a physical examination by a professional.

Did you read the article? Because it's right there in the article. Like it's happening now. this is a real thing that is happening right now in Texas.

I'm sorry that you think it shouldn't be happening. But it is happening. This is what happens when you try to legislate exceptions. People fall through the cracks and people suffer. If you think that there are sometimes justifiable reasons to have abortion then the only Reasonable and moral thing to do is to support abortion access. Because any restrictions that you put on abortion access is going to hurt people

Thoughts on being pro-life

If I had to choose, I would easily be more of a “liberal” than a “conservative”

This is because I want to see many changes that liberals also want

But there is a huge contention between me and liberals

And as a result, it may be the only thing about be that could be called “conservative”

I deeply believe the medical practice of induced abortion is morally reprehensible

I don’t believe it is a right anyone has, nor do I believe it should be legal

For this reason, I can be called “pro-life”

I accept this label, but with this acceptance I have something else to say

Many people who consider themselves “pro-life” are not consistent

I believe it is inconsistent to be against abortion, but in favor of instigating war

In favor of killing non-human animals

In favor of executing criminals

These are all terrible things that are not pro-life, but anti-life

In yet, many pro-life conservatives seem all too willing to go to war, to hunt and eat animals, and to execute criminals

I ask that these conservatives consider their values deeper

I ask that they hold on tighter to their reverence of life, retaining it for the unborn but also expanding it for foreign peoples, other animals, and even heinous criminals

Life is precious

I believe that being pro-life is the most moral position to take on the abortion debate

And having said that, I believe that being vegan, against instigation of war, and against capital punishment would also be the more moral positions in their respective debates, and that they are entirely consistent with being pro-life

And as for the liberals

Liberals seem to be very passionate about ending discrimination

Discrimination is something that must end, I will join them in that conviction

But tell me, what is discrimination if not drawing arbitrary lines about who receives what consideration?

Is it not discriminatory to classify a fetus, not as an unborn he, she, or they but as an “it”?

An “it” that we are entitled to destroy whenever we please?

Being pro-life shouldn’t be seen as a liberal or conservative issue

It is a moral issue

A question of consideration and rights

And I do not believe that anyone for reason of race, sex, or age should be killed

This is not an anti-woman position

This is an anti-killing position

Please

Leave the unborn alone

And while we’re at it

Leave women alone, leave minorities alone, leave foreigners alone, leave other animals alone

For the love of all that is good

Please

Stop oppression

Stop violence

Hi. This seems very sincere and from a very well intentioned place. It also, however, comes across as very niave and uninformed. I don’t say that to be mean or insulting, only to specify that while I believe your heart is in the right place, you don’t have the facts of the situation. This post is going to be lengthy, but only because I believe you deserve a chance to understand.

The simple truth is that restrictions on abortion are, by definition, *not* leaving women and minorities alone. Abortion restrictions, by their very nature, are an attack on the safety and legal standing of anyone who can get pregnant.

The disconnect you’re having here is that you aren’t stopping to consider *why* abortion is the choice some people make, and what harm happens when that choice is taken away. You aren’t thinking about the ways in which abortion is harm reduction, or the ways in which its access protects people who have the ability to become pregnant from some very very serious abuse and exploitation.

The ability to become pregnant makes us uniquely vulnerable. It means that an act of violence against us, an unlucky experience with some contraceptives, or even a wanted pregnancy that is medically unviable can instantly endanger our physical, emotional, mental, and financial safety. The ways in which an unplanned pregnancy can trap people in unsafe situations or inhibit their ability stay safe.

There are many situations where a person who is already in a bad situation becoming pregnant can make that situation much much worse- even deadly. Homicide (often by an intimate partner) is the number 1 cause of death for pregnant people in the United States after all. If you’re in an abusive relationship, an unplanned pregnancy can make leaving far riskier and more logistically complicated. It can increase the frequency or intensity of that abuse. If you are assaulted, the person who assaulted you *doesnt* automatically lose parental rights to any resulting child- even if that puts you at continued risk of abuse.

Pregnancy can trigger extreme dysphoria and other mental health issues for folks. It can trigger serious physical health issues. It can mean you aren’t supposed to continue the use the prescribed medications for serious health conditions. (We’ve already seen cases of people being taken to court over miscarriages because of medication they had been taking.) We have seen people be told their chemotherapy has to be delayed because of a pregnancy- decisions that killed those people.

Abortion bans, even with exceptions for the health of the pregnant person, slows care for people who are experiencing pregnancy loss. We are already seeing horrific cases of medical neglect here in Texas as hospitals tell people going through miscarriages that they have to *wait* until they are *more sick* to get treatment- closer to sepsis, closer to permanent infertility or disability, closer to death themselves- before they can recieve care because legally its that grey area.

And fundamentally, restrictions on abortion are an attack on our personhood under the law. They say that if you become pregnant, your body, your organs, your blood and bones- they are no longer yours as long as that pregnancy is happening. This fundamental legal fact is imposed on no one else in our society. In no other situation is another person (and I’m fine saying that a fetus is legally a person) entitled to use your organs against your will.

To be clear, the argument here isn’t “its OK to kill a fetus because of its age.” The argument is that “no person, regardless of age, is entitled to the physical organs of another without consent, even if withholding or withdrawing access to that other person’s body will lead to their death.” It’s “unwanted pregnancy can fall into the realm of self defense, and a person is legally allowed to protect themselves from harm with potentially deadly means if necessary.” It’s “there are very good and legitimate reasons for abortion sometimes but the only people who should be able to make that call are the pregnant person with the consultation of their doctor.” It’s “pregnancy and abortion are deeply intimate issues and the choice to carry or abort a pregnancy should not be left up to Ted Cruz.”

Reread your own post. Notice how nowhere in it do you mention the people who are actually pregnant when talking about consideration and rights. Think about who you are and aren’t thinking about here.

Look, I understand. It’s sad that the fetus dies. I’m not asking you to celebrate that. But the way to actually help is to champion causes that EXPAND options for people, that give people more choices so that fewer choose abortion. Because taking options away will only ever hurt people. Champion socialized health care and guaranteed paid parental leave, subsidized prenatal care and child care, expanded protections for domestic abuse and sexual assault survivors, easier affordable access to contraceptives and plan b. Those things- which consider what circumstances can make abortion the choice people chose and providing support- are going to do far far far more good in the world than abortion bans ever could. Abortion bans are not just a less good option, they are actively harmful and hostile to those who can get pregnant.

I want you to consider the ways in which prioritizing the beginning of life over living people’s quality of life can and does cause harm. That prioritizing getting a fetus to term over the health and safety of already living people can and does cause suffering. It’s a quantity of life over a quality of life mindset that ignores and causes suffering and pain. And I would argue that it is a moral evil to say “it’s good to make people suffer if that suffering leads to more people being born.”

Never forget that forced pregnancy is considered a crime against humanity by the UN. Think about why.

Again, I don’t think you are a bad person or an evil person for what you have said here. But I do think your lack of nuance and awareness on this topic is causing you to support legislation and politicians that is hurting a lot of people.

@attemptatthought just use reblogs. Replies are like the worst way to have a conversation on this site. Just use reblogs.

And I will *always* talk about extreme cases, because you never know what an individual person’s situation is. You don’t know why someone might chose abortion. You aren’t privy to that.

And if you write and support legislation that *ignores* extreme situations, then you will directly cause the suffering of those people.

For a lot of people, an unwanted pregnancy is not a temporary burden. It can be a death sentence. And if you don’t consider those people, then you get situations like what we have here in Texas. And it’s not good. It is causing suffering and harm and death.

The only person who can truly truly say how extreme an individuals situation is, how dangerous or how devastating- is the person who is pregnant themselves (with some medical input from a doctor perhaps.)

Again, I think it’s a moral evil to say that we should cause human suffering because it leads to more births. I think that is a morally repugnant way to approach basically any situation.

It’s also helpful to look around at who your allies are in this fight. Because while a lot of prolifers are like you- well intentioned but niave - many are also violent misogynists who resent women’s lib and feminism and want to turn pregnancy into a vulnerability again. A weapon with which we can be harmed and disenfranchised. They resent that our ability to become pregnant no longer kept us in the home, and their legislation will seek to chain us back there.

If you recognize that SOMETIMES there are justifiable reasons to get an abortion, and you realize that you aren’t omnipotent and can’t know the details of anyone’s life, then it logically and morally makes sense to support legal abortion access.

@fandomsandfeminism thanks for your advice. I’m not very tech savvy. I don’t think we should have laws that ignore extreme situations. I also don’t think we should have laws that treat all situations equally. Perhaps some abortion is negotiable in terms of being legal. That being said I think most abortion should not be legal because they are not the extreme cases people mention.

But that's the thing- there isn't a way to legislate like that. When we try, people still suffer.

Again, look at Texas.

This is what "medical exceptions" look like- people sent home with a dying fetus inside them, told to wait until they are sick enough for care. Told to wait until that miscarriage becomes septic so that it's justifiable under the law.

What if you have an exception because of rape- how do you prove you qualify? Rape trials, notoriously hard to get to court, take months.

What if you have an exception for a domestic abuse situation? How do you prove that? How long would it take? Would it not open you up to more abuse when you seek that exception?

What if you have an exemption because of mental health risks? How do you prove your need is great enough? How do you prove that you mean it? That it's bad enough to count?

You can't.

You can't legislate this.

You just need to *trust* that the people who are choosing abortion have a good reason. Trust that they aren't monsters. They aren't evil. They are just people who know their circumstances better than you or I or Joe Biden or Ted Cruz ever could. That's how you make sure that only the people who need abortions get them- trust the people who are in the situation, and fight to give them as many options as possible.

Anything less will hurt people. Will kill people.

Thoughts on being pro-life

If I had to choose, I would easily be more of a “liberal” than a “conservative”

This is because I want to see many changes that liberals also want

But there is a huge contention between me and liberals

And as a result, it may be the only thing about be that could be called “conservative”

I deeply believe the medical practice of induced abortion is morally reprehensible

I don’t believe it is a right anyone has, nor do I believe it should be legal

For this reason, I can be called “pro-life”

I accept this label, but with this acceptance I have something else to say

Many people who consider themselves “pro-life” are not consistent

I believe it is inconsistent to be against abortion, but in favor of instigating war

In favor of killing non-human animals

In favor of executing criminals

These are all terrible things that are not pro-life, but anti-life

In yet, many pro-life conservatives seem all too willing to go to war, to hunt and eat animals, and to execute criminals

I ask that these conservatives consider their values deeper

I ask that they hold on tighter to their reverence of life, retaining it for the unborn but also expanding it for foreign peoples, other animals, and even heinous criminals

Life is precious

I believe that being pro-life is the most moral position to take on the abortion debate

And having said that, I believe that being vegan, against instigation of war, and against capital punishment would also be the more moral positions in their respective debates, and that they are entirely consistent with being pro-life

And as for the liberals

Liberals seem to be very passionate about ending discrimination

Discrimination is something that must end, I will join them in that conviction

But tell me, what is discrimination if not drawing arbitrary lines about who receives what consideration?

Is it not discriminatory to classify a fetus, not as an unborn he, she, or they but as an “it”?

An “it” that we are entitled to destroy whenever we please?

Being pro-life shouldn’t be seen as a liberal or conservative issue

It is a moral issue

A question of consideration and rights

And I do not believe that anyone for reason of race, sex, or age should be killed

This is not an anti-woman position

This is an anti-killing position

Please

Leave the unborn alone

And while we’re at it

Leave women alone, leave minorities alone, leave foreigners alone, leave other animals alone

For the love of all that is good

Please

Stop oppression

Stop violence

Hi. This seems very sincere and from a very well intentioned place. It also, however, comes across as very niave and uninformed. I don’t say that to be mean or insulting, only to specify that while I believe your heart is in the right place, you don’t have the facts of the situation. This post is going to be lengthy, but only because I believe you deserve a chance to understand.

The simple truth is that restrictions on abortion are, by definition, *not* leaving women and minorities alone. Abortion restrictions, by their very nature, are an attack on the safety and legal standing of anyone who can get pregnant.

The disconnect you’re having here is that you aren’t stopping to consider *why* abortion is the choice some people make, and what harm happens when that choice is taken away. You aren’t thinking about the ways in which abortion is harm reduction, or the ways in which its access protects people who have the ability to become pregnant from some very very serious abuse and exploitation.

The ability to become pregnant makes us uniquely vulnerable. It means that an act of violence against us, an unlucky experience with some contraceptives, or even a wanted pregnancy that is medically unviable can instantly endanger our physical, emotional, mental, and financial safety. The ways in which an unplanned pregnancy can trap people in unsafe situations or inhibit their ability stay safe.

There are many situations where a person who is already in a bad situation becoming pregnant can make that situation much much worse- even deadly. Homicide (often by an intimate partner) is the number 1 cause of death for pregnant people in the United States after all. If you’re in an abusive relationship, an unplanned pregnancy can make leaving far riskier and more logistically complicated. It can increase the frequency or intensity of that abuse. If you are assaulted, the person who assaulted you *doesnt* automatically lose parental rights to any resulting child- even if that puts you at continued risk of abuse.

Pregnancy can trigger extreme dysphoria and other mental health issues for folks. It can trigger serious physical health issues. It can mean you aren’t supposed to continue the use the prescribed medications for serious health conditions. (We’ve already seen cases of people being taken to court over miscarriages because of medication they had been taking.) We have seen people be told their chemotherapy has to be delayed because of a pregnancy- decisions that killed those people.

Abortion bans, even with exceptions for the health of the pregnant person, slows care for people who are experiencing pregnancy loss. We are already seeing horrific cases of medical neglect here in Texas as hospitals tell people going through miscarriages that they have to *wait* until they are *more sick* to get treatment- closer to sepsis, closer to permanent infertility or disability, closer to death themselves- before they can recieve care because legally its that grey area.

And fundamentally, restrictions on abortion are an attack on our personhood under the law. They say that if you become pregnant, your body, your organs, your blood and bones- they are no longer yours as long as that pregnancy is happening. This fundamental legal fact is imposed on no one else in our society. In no other situation is another person (and I’m fine saying that a fetus is legally a person) entitled to use your organs against your will.

To be clear, the argument here isn’t “its OK to kill a fetus because of its age.” The argument is that “no person, regardless of age, is entitled to the physical organs of another without consent, even if withholding or withdrawing access to that other person’s body will lead to their death.” It’s “unwanted pregnancy can fall into the realm of self defense, and a person is legally allowed to protect themselves from harm with potentially deadly means if necessary.” It’s “there are very good and legitimate reasons for abortion sometimes but the only people who should be able to make that call are the pregnant person with the consultation of their doctor.” It’s “pregnancy and abortion are deeply intimate issues and the choice to carry or abort a pregnancy should not be left up to Ted Cruz.”

Reread your own post. Notice how nowhere in it do you mention the people who are actually pregnant when talking about consideration and rights. Think about who you are and aren’t thinking about here.

Look, I understand. It’s sad that the fetus dies. I’m not asking you to celebrate that. But the way to actually help is to champion causes that EXPAND options for people, that give people more choices so that fewer choose abortion. Because taking options away will only ever hurt people. Champion socialized health care and guaranteed paid parental leave, subsidized prenatal care and child care, expanded protections for domestic abuse and sexual assault survivors, easier affordable access to contraceptives and plan b. Those things- which consider what circumstances can make abortion the choice people chose and providing support- are going to do far far far more good in the world than abortion bans ever could. Abortion bans are not just a less good option, they are actively harmful and hostile to those who can get pregnant.

I want you to consider the ways in which prioritizing the beginning of life over living people’s quality of life can and does cause harm. That prioritizing getting a fetus to term over the health and safety of already living people can and does cause suffering. It’s a quantity of life over a quality of life mindset that ignores and causes suffering and pain. And I would argue that it is a moral evil to say “it’s good to make people suffer if that suffering leads to more people being born.”

Never forget that forced pregnancy is considered a crime against humanity by the UN. Think about why.

Again, I don’t think you are a bad person or an evil person for what you have said here. But I do think your lack of nuance and awareness on this topic is causing you to support legislation and politicians that is hurting a lot of people.

@attemptatthought just use reblogs. Replies are like the worst way to have a conversation on this site. Just use reblogs.

And I will *always* talk about extreme cases, because you never know what an individual person's situation is. You don't know why someone might chose abortion. You aren't privy to that.

And if you write and support legislation that *ignores* extreme situations, then you will directly cause the suffering of those people.

For a lot of people, an unwanted pregnancy is not a temporary burden. It can be a death sentence. And if you don't consider those people, then you get situations like what we have here in Texas. And it's not good. It is causing suffering and harm and death.

The only person who can truly truly say how extreme an individuals situation is, how dangerous or how devastating- is the person who is pregnant themselves (with some medical input from a doctor perhaps.)

Again, I think it's a moral evil to say that we should cause human suffering because it leads to more births. I think that is a morally repugnant way to approach basically any situation.

It's also helpful to look around at who your allies are in this fight. Because while a lot of prolifers are like you- well intentioned but niave - many are also violent misogynists who resent women's lib and feminism and want to turn pregnancy into a vulnerability again. A weapon with which we can be harmed and disenfranchised. They resent that our ability to become pregnant no longer kept us in the home, and their legislation will seek to chain us back there.

If you recognize that SOMETIMES there are justifiable reasons to get an abortion, and you realize that you aren't omnipotent and can't know the details of anyone's life, then it logically and morally makes sense to support legal abortion access.

Thoughts on being pro-life

If I had to choose, I would easily be more of a “liberal” than a “conservative”

This is because I want to see many changes that liberals also want

But there is a huge contention between me and liberals

And as a result, it may be the only thing about be that could be called “conservative”

I deeply believe the medical practice of induced abortion is morally reprehensible

I don’t believe it is a right anyone has, nor do I believe it should be legal

For this reason, I can be called “pro-life”

I accept this label, but with this acceptance I have something else to say

Many people who consider themselves “pro-life” are not consistent

I believe it is inconsistent to be against abortion, but in favor of instigating war

In favor of killing non-human animals

In favor of executing criminals

These are all terrible things that are not pro-life, but anti-life

In yet, many pro-life conservatives seem all too willing to go to war, to hunt and eat animals, and to execute criminals

I ask that these conservatives consider their values deeper

I ask that they hold on tighter to their reverence of life, retaining it for the unborn but also expanding it for foreign peoples, other animals, and even heinous criminals

Life is precious

I believe that being pro-life is the most moral position to take on the abortion debate

And having said that, I believe that being vegan, against instigation of war, and against capital punishment would also be the more moral positions in their respective debates, and that they are entirely consistent with being pro-life

And as for the liberals

Liberals seem to be very passionate about ending discrimination

Discrimination is something that must end, I will join them in that conviction

But tell me, what is discrimination if not drawing arbitrary lines about who receives what consideration?

Is it not discriminatory to classify a fetus, not as an unborn he, she, or they but as an “it”?

An “it” that we are entitled to destroy whenever we please?

Being pro-life shouldn’t be seen as a liberal or conservative issue

It is a moral issue

A question of consideration and rights

And I do not believe that anyone for reason of race, sex, or age should be killed

This is not an anti-woman position

This is an anti-killing position

Please

Leave the unborn alone

And while we’re at it

Leave women alone, leave minorities alone, leave foreigners alone, leave other animals alone

For the love of all that is good

Please

Stop oppression

Stop violence

Hi. This seems very sincere and from a very well intentioned place. It also, however, comes across as very niave and uninformed. I don't say that to be mean or insulting, only to specify that while I believe your heart is in the right place, you don't have the facts of the situation. This post is going to be lengthy, but only because I believe you deserve a chance to understand.

The simple truth is that restrictions on abortion are, by definition, *not* leaving women and minorities alone. Abortion restrictions, by their very nature, are an attack on the safety and legal standing of anyone who can get pregnant.

The disconnect you're having here is that you aren't stopping to consider *why* abortion is the choice some people make, and what harm happens when that choice is taken away. You aren't thinking about the ways in which abortion is harm reduction, or the ways in which its access protects people who have the ability to become pregnant from some very very serious abuse and exploitation.

The ability to become pregnant makes us uniquely vulnerable. It means that an act of violence against us, an unlucky experience with some contraceptives, or even a wanted pregnancy that is medically unviable can instantly endanger our physical, emotional, mental, and financial safety. The ways in which an unplanned pregnancy can trap people in unsafe situations or inhibit their ability stay safe.

There are many situations where a person who is already in a bad situation becoming pregnant can make that situation much much worse- even deadly. Homicide (often by an intimate partner) is the number 1 cause of death for pregnant people in the United States after all. If you're in an abusive relationship, an unplanned pregnancy can make leaving far riskier and more logistically complicated. It can increase the frequency or intensity of that abuse. If you are assaulted, the person who assaulted you *doesnt* automatically lose parental rights to any resulting child- even if that puts you at continued risk of abuse.

Pregnancy can trigger extreme dysphoria and other mental health issues for folks. It can trigger serious physical health issues. It can mean you aren't supposed to continue the use the prescribed medications for serious health conditions. (We've already seen cases of people being taken to court over miscarriages because of medication they had been taking.) We have seen people be told their chemotherapy has to be delayed because of a pregnancy- decisions that killed those people.

Abortion bans, even with exceptions for the health of the pregnant person, slows care for people who are experiencing pregnancy loss. We are already seeing horrific cases of medical neglect here in Texas as hospitals tell people going through miscarriages that they have to *wait* until they are *more sick* to get treatment- closer to sepsis, closer to permanent infertility or disability, closer to death themselves- before they can recieve care because legally its that grey area.

And fundamentally, restrictions on abortion are an attack on our personhood under the law. They say that if you become pregnant, your body, your organs, your blood and bones- they are no longer yours as long as that pregnancy is happening. This fundamental legal fact is imposed on no one else in our society. In no other situation is another person (and I'm fine saying that a fetus is legally a person) entitled to use your organs against your will.

To be clear, the argument here isn't "its OK to kill a fetus because of its age." The argument is that "no person, regardless of age, is entitled to the physical organs of another without consent, even if withholding or withdrawing access to that other person's body will lead to their death." It's "unwanted pregnancy can fall into the realm of self defense, and a person is legally allowed to protect themselves from harm with potentially deadly means if necessary." It's "there are very good and legitimate reasons for abortion sometimes but the only people who should be able to make that call are the pregnant person with the consultation of their doctor." It's "pregnancy and abortion are deeply intimate issues and the choice to carry or abort a pregnancy should not be left up to Ted Cruz."

Reread your own post. Notice how nowhere in it do you mention the people who are actually pregnant when talking about consideration and rights. Think about who you are and aren't thinking about here.

Look, I understand. It's sad that the fetus dies. I'm not asking you to celebrate that. But the way to actually help is to champion causes that EXPAND options for people, that give people more choices so that fewer choose abortion. Because taking options away will only ever hurt people. Champion socialized health care and guaranteed paid parental leave, subsidized prenatal care and child care, expanded protections for domestic abuse and sexual assault survivors, easier affordable access to contraceptives and plan b. Those things- which consider what circumstances can make abortion the choice people chose and providing support- are going to do far far far more good in the world than abortion bans ever could. Abortion bans are not just a less good option, they are actively harmful and hostile to those who can get pregnant.

I want you to consider the ways in which prioritizing the beginning of life over living people's quality of life can and does cause harm. That prioritizing getting a fetus to term over the health and safety of already living people can and does cause suffering. It's a quantity of life over a quality of life mindset that ignores and causes suffering and pain. And I would argue that it is a moral evil to say "it's good to make people suffer if that suffering leads to more people being born."

Never forget that forced pregnancy is considered a crime against humanity by the UN. Think about why.

Again, I don't think you are a bad person or an evil person for what you have said here. But I do think your lack of nuance and awareness on this topic is causing you to support legislation and politicians that is hurting a lot of people.

Right now: Use the Promo Code MAGPIE for 25% off.

just learned that magnolias are so old that they’re pollinated by beetles because they existed before bees

They existed *before beetles*

Why is this sad? Why am I sad?

https://xkcd.com/1259/

This is how I feel about Joshua Trees. They and avocado trees produce fruit meant to be eaten and dispersed by giant ground sloths. Without them, the Joshua Trees' range has shrunk by 90%.

(my own photos)

Not only they, but the entire Mojave ecosystem is still struggling to adapt since the loss of ground sloth dung. their chief fertilizer.

Many, many trees and plants in the Americas have widely-spaced, extremely long thorns that do nothing to discourage deer eating their leaves, but would've penetrated the fur of ground sloths and mammoths. Likewise, if you've observed a tree that drops baseball or softball-sized fruit which lies on the ground and rots, like Osage Oranges, which were great for playing catch at my school, chances are they were ground sloth or mammoth chow.

You can read about various orphaned plants and trees missing their megafauna in this poignant post:



First quote from the linked article. Found it poetic.

Ouyang is such an interesting character istg. I need a spin off series detailing his entire life just so I can study him.

he’s literally pure rage. he’s fuming all the time. he’s miserable and angry and pissed off and would rather die than even attempt to change or be happy in any way. he kills the one person he loves after destroying Esen’s life and kingdom. he violently denies himself any pleasure out of self loathing yet keeps spec sheet of everyone who was ever mean to him. he desperately wants to be seen and understood as much as he wants to rid the world of anyone who even comes close. don’t even get me started on his deeply complex and incredibly simple misogyny    

I’ve never seen such a fucked up, hateful main character. Ouyang is a pathetic, horrible little man in every objective and subjective sense and I love him so much

holy shit

With the Queen dying, we’re one step closer-

NOW IRELAND NOW-