womans right to choose


In two short days America will elect its next president and a woman’s right to choose hangs in the balance. The Supreme Court is the last line of defense for safe, legal, and accessible abortion, and the next president will determine the court’s makeup for decades to come.

Before you vote, make sure you understand the issues. Our friends at Refinery29 (@refinery29) gathered a panel of healthcare policy experts and doctors to answer questions about abortion access and reproductive rights.

Art by Creatr @thatnoisegallery


Tomi Lahren said she’s pro-choice on ‘The View’ and proceeded to get dragged by conservative Twitter

  • Strident conservative mouthpiece Tomi Lahren may finally have said too much.
  • In a Friday segment on The View, the 24-year-old political commentator, who has offended many with her spirited defense of President Donald Trump, gun rights and reverse racism has alienated much of her fan base with her defense of a less predictable issue: a woman’s right to choose.
  • ”I’m pro-choice and here’s why,“ Lahren told The View co-hosts, when prompted to speak on the subject of Trump’s subpar treatment of women. Read more. (3/19/2017 10:13 AM)
No woman wants an abortion like she wants an ice cream cone or a Porsche. She wants an abortion like an animal caught in a trap wants to gnaw off its own leg.
—  Frederica Mathewes-Green
Two Types of Fear Going into Election Day

Hillary Supporters: scared their basic liberties will be taken away, their people will be branded rapists and thieves, they’ll be deported, gay marriage will be revoked, religious freedom will become a thing of the past, jailing political opponents will become the norm, a woman’s right to choose will be eliminated, life for all lgbt+ and people of color will become hell on earth, and civilization will step fifty years into the past

Trump supporters: scared they won’t be allowed to make racist facebook posts with impugnity anymore

PSA about Beauty and the Beast

PSA about Beauty and the Beast:

Recently I have seen some strange posts along the lines of “Why can’t they follow the original dark ending?  Why does Disney have to give it a Happy ending?” in regard to Beauty and the Beast.

I decided to get to the bottom of this and found there is an old Internet rumor that the original Beauty and the Beast ended with either the death of The Beast or The Beast eating Belle.  Whoever started this rumor is confusing Beauty and the Beast for the oldest version of Little Red Riding Hood also known as Little Red Riding Cap (from 1693).

The version of Beauty and the Beast that is the popular fairy tale is an abridged and revised version of the surprisingly feminist 1740 French novel La Belle et la Bête by Madame  Gabrielle-Suzanne Barbot de Villeneuve.  (It talks about a woman’s right to choose a husband, and The Prince’s mother was a Queen who lead an army to defend her kingdom).

No version of Beauty and the Beast exists in which The Beast eats Belle (Beauty) or where The Beast dies and stays dead.  There are versions where the evil faery haunts Belle with dreams that The Beast will bring her ruin if not kill her and there are versions where Belle’s sisters conspire to try to get the Beast to eat her but it never happens.  The Beast comes close to death or briefly dies but he never once stays dead. That version simply does not exist.   This Internet rumor needs to stop.

If you doubt me you can buy the original novel on Amazon translated by Rachel Louise Lawrence, completely unabridged or you can check out the book The Classic Fairy Tales by Iona and Peter Opie which gives the full history of many of the classic fairy tales and their various alternate versions.

The darkest thing about the original Beauty and the Beast novel is that the faery who raised The Prince (because his mother was off fighting a war) tried to seduce him as soon as he was of age and Belle (who discovers her mother was actually a faery and father was actually a king, she had only believed the merchant to be her father) and the Beast turned out to be cousins.   And yes, they marry.

The faery tale that originally ended in the death of the protagonist was Little Red Riding Cap.   The Little mermaid ended in death too but that was Hans Christian Anderson, not Madame de Villeneuve.

Also just because we are used to things ending tragically doesn’t mean it should.  Think how cynical the world has become where enchanted castles and faeries aren’t what we consider far fetched but simply the idea of things ending well and yet things sometimes do end well in the real world.  It’s not actually realistic to expect everything to always end poorly.   Sometimes things really do end happily.


“I am all about a woman’s right to choose. I think a woman should do anything she wants as it relates to her face, her body, her health. Whatever mode of expression that empowers you, that’s what you should do. What I am not down for is this ridiculously high, unrealistic expectation about appearance that we as women are held to.” - Alicia Keys for “ALLURE” Magazine February 2017

I'm a bit pissed right now so I'm just going to leave this here.

If you’re really pro-choice, and say you support a woman’s right to choose, you better fucking support a trans woman’s right to have hrt and get srs if she so desires.

(I know I’m going to get hate for this.)

Here’s what we are going to lose:

The Supreme Court will be dominated by conservative justices for a generation.

Same-sex marriage will likely be outlawed on a national level.

A woman’s right to choose will end.

Social Security will be cut. Or even eliminated.

The rich will get more tax breaks.

Medicare will be cut or repealed.

Obamacare will be repealed.

We are likely to head into a recession, possibly a depression.

There will be no action on climate change.

Our international relationships will be destroyed.

NATO will be crippled or disbanded.

Oil drilling, fracking, and pipelines will get tax benefits and govt subsidies.

We are likely to end up in a war with Iran.

We might see the end of the free press.

And, because this man believes in revenge, there may be mass incarcerations.

Because …

There will be no grownups in the room.

The coup is complete. America is over.

Now you know what Germany felt like in 1932.

If you’re not terrified, you haven’t been paying attention.

—  David Gerrold, screenwriter
What does the Bible say: Abortion?

What does the Bible say about abortion?

The Bible never really addresses the issue of abortion. However, there are teachings in Scripture that make it abundantly clear what God’s view of abortion is. Jeremiah 1:5 tells us that God knows us before He forms us in the womb. Psalm 139:13-16 speaks of God’s active role in our creation and formation in the womb. Exodus 21:22-25 prescribes the same penalty—death—for someone who causes the death of a baby in the womb as for someone who commits murder. This clearly indicates that God considers a baby in the womb to be as human as a full-grown adult. For the Christian, abortion is not a matter of a woman’s right to choose. It is a matter of the life or death of a human being made in God’s image (Genesis 1:26-27; 9:6).The Bible is clear that all human life is created by God for His purpose and His pleasure (Colossians 1:16) So when humans take life it displeases God even when its an unborn baby. Exodus 21:22-25 clearly states that its a life inside the womb. (you are to take life for life)  So therefor abortion is murder. Murder of an innocent child.

For those who have had an abortion, remember that the sin of abortion is no less forgivable than any other sin. Through faith in Christ, all sins can be forgiven (John 3:16; Romans 8:1; Colossians 1:14). A woman who has had an abortion, a man who has encouraged an abortion, or even a doctor who has performed one, can all be forgiven by faith in Jesus Christ.

westwinterblue  asked:

Hi, I was looking through your blog and it made me curious: I personally don't really know what I believe. Like on one hand I believe that unborn babies are alive as soon as their heart starts beating separate from it's mother's heart. But at the same time, I feel like woman should have that right to choose. I guess what I'm asking is if I am a traditional feminist with prolife values, then where is the middle ground? I'm open minded so you wont scare me away with any of your controversial views

Hi! Thanks for contacting me!

I can definitely see how that can be confusing. First, I want to clarify what you’re saying about the biology of when life begins. Human life actually starts before the heart starts beating - otherwise, how could a heart grow if there was no living, growing, developing organism? At fertilization, a new member of the human species exists with its own genetic code and its own developmental path totally distinct from that of the mother. The mother’s body supplies nutrients and oxygen, but her blood never mixes with her child’s (many mothers and children have different blood types) and her heart does not beat for the child. Starting at fertilization, the child’s cells are growing, dividing, and differentiating to develop the various systems of the body (nervous, cardiovascular, respiratory, etc). The heartbeat begins when the cardiovascular system develops to the point that it needs a pumping heart to distribute nutrients, hormonal signals, and oxygen to the various cells. This happens after about 3 weeks (18-22 days) of life and development within this new organism.

That said, most women don’t know they’re pregnant until around the time the heart starts beating (4-6 weeks after their last menstrual period), so in the majority of cases a child who is intentionally aborted has a beating heart.

Now let’s talk about choice. We all make choices every day. We choose what to wear, what to eat, what to study in school, what to do for a living, and so on. We can also make choices that directly affect other people. All of our choices have consequences, whether those consequences are good, bad, or neutral.

Every law we have restricts our choices in some way. Traffic laws restrict how we operate our cars. Taxes restrict how we spend our money. Regulations restrict how we run businesses. We may debate whether or not these laws are necessary or justified. Other laws, like laws against stealing or killing, restrict choices that would directly harm other people. Most of us can agree that these laws are both justified and necessary for a functioning and peaceful society. If we wanted complete freedom of choice, that would be anarchy. Any government that exists restricts your choices in some way.

The question, then, is whether it is necessary and/or justified to restrict a woman’s choice to have an abortion. To me, the answer to that question lies in whether an abortion directly harms another person. If it does not, then restrictions on abortion would fall into the category of government regulations that are highly debatable and probably an unjustified or unnecessary restriction of our right to choose. If, however, abortion does directly and intentionally harm another person, then a restriction or ban on abortion would fall into the category of laws against stealing or killing, and would therefore be both justified and necessary.

I believe the latter is true. Like you, I believe that abortion kills a living human being. Therefore, our law that already exists banning the intentional and premeditated killing of human beings should also protect preborn human beings. That is, we shouldn’t need a law against abortion. We just need to include preborn human beings as people protected by the law.

This still leaves women with a lot of choices. I just don’t believe anyone has the right to kill another person except in a self-defense situation (which does not describe pregnancy).

Now, I don’t consider myself a feminist. Largely, this is because I don’t want to be associated with what the modern feminist movement has become. However, there are many pro-life feminists who have found a way to balance a concern for women’s rights and welfare with a concern for the lives of the preborn. In fact, many will say that the two can actually go hand-in-hand.

I recommend checking out the following organizations for more on how you can be pro-life and feminist:

Feminists for Life

Feminists for Nonviolent Choices

New Wave Feminists

Secular Pro-Life

Life Matters Journal (@lifemattersjournal)

I know this was a really long answer to your question, so let me know if you need me to clarify anything or if you have any questions! I’m happy to continue this conversation as long as you want to.

“I am extremely blessed and fortunate to have a platform where I can speak out on the issues I’m the most concerned about: namely, the future of women’s rights. Here’s the thing: We can talk politics all day. We can talk about how women are statistically paid less than men. We can also talk about a woman’s right to choose. But something that’s really tickling my sleeve is actually much more basic than any of that. I’m upset with how women are being raised in our society today Right now, women are being taught to view themselves based on their physical appearance. It’s 2017, and we are still allowing our looks to dictate who we should be or how worthy we are. How crazy is that?. But worthy of what, is my question. What are we not worthy enough for? What exactly are we trying so hard to be worthy of? I am not going to sit here and pretend that I do not think or feel these things. It’s what I have been taught, and what we will keep teaching generations of women to come if we don’t demand a major cultural shift. But I am here to tell you it’s bullshit. And it’s distracting you from the things that are really important. I often wonder where all this hate and misogyny even started from. How did we let it get this bad? And why aren’t we stopping it? So many people go online, ready to spread negativity as opposed to compassion for others. But I say fuck the haters. Let’s be us. Whatever we wanna be in this world, we can be. Recognize the power in that. Let it sink in.”

to assert that being a woman is a matter of identity, that it’s a choice one makes or a costume one puts on, is so assert that women, collectively, could identify out of womanhood, and end our own oppression.
i don’t know of a single woman who “identifies” with womanhood: read, being paid less, getting raped, assaulted, killed, mutilated, disrespected, shamed, coerced, etc. no woman in her right mind would choose to identify into this sex caste role of subordination, yet trans identity politics state that any woman who doesn’t identify as a woman is trans. this reduces oppression to a false dichotomy; either you’re a woman who identifies into being oppressed, or you’re not really a woman, you’re transgender!
this line of thinking overtly implies that women are responsible for ending their own oppression. that sexism would cease to exist if all women just identified differently.
if your liberal feminism tells women to identify out of being a woman to escape female oppression, then your feminism is regressive, sexist, and serving males.

anonymous asked:

also katniss is canonly an American Indian woman so like............. why did they choose such a pasty actress

RIGHT they mention over and over that she has dark skin and dark hair and not to mention katniss is described as being like super small and skinny….like I’m all 4 body positivity and was surprised when they cast jlaw bc she’s pretty full figured but like…..the whole driving point is that katniss has the advantage bc of how small/short she is and how much ppl underestimate her LOL 

I’ve been getting a few messages from people who seem to think that all feminists care about is that women don’t belong in the kitchen, or staying at home in any capacity. That we think motherhood is the bane of a women’s existence. I’d just like to say that as feminists, we believe in a woman’s right to CHOOSE, choose whether she wants to work, how she works, in what industry. Whether she wants to be a mother at all, a working mother or a stay at home mother. We don’t care if a woman happens to be a full time parent, all we care about is that she has the ability to make free decisions about her life, and is not inhibited by restrictions placed upon her by the law, and society.


A 21-year old woman in Northern Ireland has been handed down a three month suspended sentence for inducing her own abortion through abortion pills that she purchased online. She was reported to the police by her housemates. Abortion in almost all cases is illegal in Northern Ireland and can lead to extremely harsh criminal sentencing. In the wake of this case it is important to take a look at the draconian attitudes and legislation that exist in Northern Ireland in relation to abortion. They are outdated. There is at least one other current court case where a woman may be facing jail time for procuring/supplying abortion pills (which are illegal in the North) for her daughter. And with an open letter with approximately 200 signatures admitting to helping other women procure abortion pills in Northern Ireland, it is clear that these laws are unworkable, unrealistic and illogical. Every woman should have the right to choose, and it’s up to us to reduce the stigma so that women can make their own decisions without judgement, unwarranted criticism and criminal convictions.