Social Question

SQUEEKY2's avatar

Should it only be female politicians at the table when it comes to these abortion laws?

Asked by SQUEEKY2 (21149points) 3 days ago

Regardless of what banner they are under, men have nothing to lose with these draconian laws.
So men should excuse themselves from this process, agree or disagree?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

73 Answers

HP's avatar

I think that would be better in theory. But as a practical matter, try to think of any other scenario where men would allow women alone to legislate anything, and in particular anything associated with or dependent on sex. And even though it does at first glance sound better, and certainly preferable to allowing the state to compel a woman to bear children, it is every bit as repugnant to allow any collection of women to force other women to bear children. But in the end, all of those other so called freedoms we are guaranteed, are pretty meaningless, if you have no choice regarding parenthood.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Not unless men are prevented from voting on this issue.

hat's avatar

Abortion is healthcare. What is this “table”? If there is a table involved, it better be to sign legislation to fully-fund abortion for everyone. It can also hold a few knives to cut the throats of anyone who has any other ideas.

JLoon's avatar

Good question.

If you’re on trial for murder you get a jury of your peers – But when it comes to passing laws that criminalize safe medical abortions you get a gang of twisted boy scouts :

States Passing Abortion Bans Have Fewest Women in Office
https://abcnews.go.com/US/states-passing-abortion-bans-lowest-rates-women-power/story?id=63050305

What’s really needed are just more sane, moderate, fair-minded representatives who can vote for real public interest instead of an extremist agenda. But good luck finding any men – or women – who fit that profile in the pack of mutts who call themselves “conservatives” today.

KNOWITALL's avatar

Not now. Only 27% of Congress are female, and only 3 of 9 on the Supreme Court.
Perhaps when equality is reached, that could be a good thing.
All were males on the SC until 1981, progress is slow.

SQUEEKY2's avatar

So @KNOWITALL you think men should be involved with this law that only seems to affect women?

KNOWITALL's avatar

They are whether we like it or not, as it’s still a patriarchy in many ways.
Even Canada is only 30.5% female Parliament.

Besides, I thought Democrats were beyond traditional gender roles. That seems like a step backwards instead of forward. Look how many men just on this site have responded on ‘female’ issues.
Instead of shutting men down we should be inviting them to get more involved, regardless of your stance.

Blackberry's avatar

Obviously.

….Did….you guys think we were joking when we said it’s a “white mans world”?

Don’t you think it’s embarrassing that we have to go ask an old racist guy to treat us fairly?

Doesn’t feel good does it? Having your life’s value determined by someone else.

Welcome to the club.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@Blackberry Fair point well made!

Zaku's avatar

Agree.

Blackwater_Park's avatar

“Regardless of what banner they are under, men have nothing to lose with these draconian laws.”
I fundamentally disagree with this premise. They stand a lot to lose, they’re going to get tangled up in all the ugliness of unwanted, or unhealthy pregnancies also. While their lives may not be at risk their loved ones lives may be, we’ll also see more broken families with unwanted children, more men stuck in dead end jobs trying to keep a family afloat that they can’t afford and possibly never wanted. I mean the list goes on….

If you follow the data men and women generally have roughly the same ideas on the matter. The idea that it’s basically only men dictating how this plays out is asinine. Their vote is actually needed

Dutchess_III's avatar

Men just bail when the going gets tough.

janbb's avatar

I think that only people who believe in the right to bodily autonomy should sit at the table.

@Dutchess_III You really do hate men, don’t you? I feel sorry for you.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@janbb Like anti-maskers? :)

janbb's avatar

Sorry @KNOWITALL I’m not going to be drawn into an argument about that false equivalency.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@janbb I was just being sassy imagining them showing up at the table. Not trying to start anything.

SQUEEKY2's avatar

@Dutchess_III I resent that last statement from you, when ever I lumped everyone in the same basket people would freak on me, NOT ME type thing.
If an accident had happened to Mrs Squeeky and myself in our early years I would have stuck with her,I am super glad it didn’t then we took steps to make sure it wouldn’t but I would have been there .

Dutchess_III's avatar

No. I hate men who bail. And way too many do.

kritiper's avatar

That could work.

Dutchess_III's avatar

I didn’t say all.men bail @SQUEEKY2. But waaay too many do.
My ex-husband bailed after 10 years of marriage and 3 kids. Left me with all the responsibility.

SEKA's avatar

Interesting fact—women’s contraceptive rights are being destroyed while men have their “little blue pill” paid for by insurance and medicare

seawulf575's avatar

I think that the pro-abortion folks view abortion as a woman-only thing. They make the assumption, apparently, that men cannot possibly care about children. Pro-life folks tend to look at the object getting aborted as a baby. And as a baby it falls to both a man and a woman…both lives are being impacted. So the answer to this question tends to fall along those lines. If you are pro-choice you believe that only women should be allowed to determine these laws, negating men in all decisions. If you are pro-life, you believe that both men and women are impacted and therefore both should be involved in the laws.

But for those of you that believe only women should have a say, would you be willing to have only men decide other things that someone viewed as only their decision…even if you felt it impacted women?

seawulf575's avatar

@Dutchess_III “Men just bail when the going gets tough.” Apparently you have met some really horrible men and only really spectacular women. When I got divorced, I fought for, and attained, custody of my 3 children…6, 2.5, 2.5. That isn’t bailing when the going gets tough. My ex, on the other hand stopped fighting so she could move across the country to live with her online boyfriend. So while you are making universal decisions about half the human race, you might want to consider things a little more. You tell people a lot more about you than you think you are.

janbb's avatar

I am pro-choice and have never said only women should make the laws. Straw man argument again.

seawulf575's avatar

@janbb You are pro-choice. So do you believe abortion is only a woman’s decision? I’m going to say yes since most pro-choicers do. Do you view the thing inside the woman as a blob of cells that is part of the woman’s body? I’m going to say yes since most pro-choicers do. So if those two things are correct, would you also agree that a man should not care what a woman does with her body? This one is a bit more odd since not all pro-choicers agree that a man doesn’t care, but they certainly want to say that only the woman can decide. Pro-lifers tend to look at the thing inside the woman as a growing life and treat it as such. In that aspect the only way a life can start is with the help of a man and a woman (generally) and therefore the man should care and should be involved in decisions about the child. So the first part of my statement is really not strawman.

The second part of my statement revolved around which side of this question each side would be on. You would likely not find a pro-lifer on the women-vote-only side. So only those on the pro-choice side would hold that opinion.

JLeslie's avatar

That’s never going to happen.

Plenty of men understand the idea of wanting control over their own bodies and believe women should have the same control over their bodies. Also, plenty of women are in favor of forcing girls and women to go through with pregnancies. It’s not like women are necessarily on board with being pro-choice, it depends which women are at the table.

I’m pretty sure Roe v Wade was decided by an all male Supreme Court.

Dutchess_III's avatar

When I told my boyfriend in college I was pregnant he said “What are you going to do?”
I said “I don’t know.”
With a touch of panic in his voice he said “Well you can’t keep it!”
“Of course I can!” I said.

jellyjellyjelly's avatar

Abortion affects men too. Have you seen how much child support costs? And how angry men get about having to pay it?

HP's avatar

Men are certainly entitled to some sway over their children, once they arrive. However, before the child arrives, no man or government has any business forcing a woman to harbor anything within her. The day will come (I suppose) when the child can be brought to term outside the woman. It would be interesting to see the legal repurcussions around that.

seawulf575's avatar

@Dutchess_III So let me ask: if you told your boyfriend in college you were pregnant and he asked what you were going to do and you said you wanted an abortion and he said “No! You have to keep it!” Would it be you that was bailing when things got tough?

LuckyGuy's avatar

From this day forth, women need to vote with their bodies a la Lysistrata .
Don’t have sex with a jerk.

Let’s see if that helps.

SQUEEKY2's avatar

To tell a woman no it’s the law ,when she was raped , or an incest event is wrong.
And that is totally the woman’s choice NOT any man under those circumstances.
NO one or Government should stand in her way of a safe abortion.

SQUEEKY2's avatar

and gee @seawulf575 do you see a fully formed baby 10 seconds after conceiving most Pro lifers do?

SnipSnip's avatar

One must not be fully formed to have its unique individual DNA. @SQUEEKY2

SQUEEKY2's avatar

Meaning what @SnipSnip ?

seawulf575's avatar

@SQUEEKY2 Have I said that? I haven’t said Rape isn’t a crime, nor that incest isn’t wrong. But how many of those actually happen in a year? We’ve been through that in other threads When you compare to consensual sex, it is miniscule. Face it, there are those, even on this thread, that view abortion as a form of contraception. Forget that contraception is supposed to prevent a pregnancy before it starts, they have conflated the definition to include abortion. And there are those on the left that have pushed for the idea of post birth abortions…you know…after the baby is born the mother should still get to decide whether or not it should live.

So, am I supposed to attribute all these brutal things to you because you support abortion? Maybe attributing the most outlandish things you can to me is not the best course of action. Maybe asking me reasonable questions to get my views might be better.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Noone supports abortion as a contraceptive. Just goes to show you know nothing about women’s bodies (surprise surprise.) Abortions are brutal on our bodies.

seawulf575's avatar

@Dutchess_III @SEKA stated earlier in this thread “Interesting fact—women’s contraceptive rights are being destroyed while men have their “little blue pill” paid for by insurance and medicare” And you say no one supports abortion as a contraceptive? And she isn’t the only one that says that.

seawulf575's avatar

@Dutchess_III another thought. You say abortions are brutal on your bodies. Are you also aware that abortions result in an increased chance of breast cancer? Kinda strange that piece is never discussed, isn’t it?

Dutchess_III's avatar

And you don’t need to worry about any of it because you’re a guy @seawulf575.

JLoon's avatar

@seawulf575- A couple months ago I swore I would never again interract with you or respond to your politically motivated disinformation. But your claim of a supposed link between abortion and breast cancer is wrong, harmful to informed decision making, and based on unreliable research.

There is no proven correlation between termination of pregnancy at any stage, and increased risk of cancer. None :

American Cancer Society -
“Linking these topics creates a great deal of emotion and debate. But scientific research studies have not found a cause-and-effect relationship between abortion and breast cancer.”
https://www.cancer.org/healthy/cancer-causes/medical-treatments/abortion-and-breast-cancer-risk.html

Medscape -
“After adjusting for potential confounders of age, parity, age at delivery of first child, and calendar period, the risk of breast cancer for women with a history of induced abortion was not different from women who had not had an induced abortion.”
https://www.medscape.com/answers/1697353-195942/how-does-abortion-affect-a-women39s-risk-for-breast-cancer

National Women’s Health Network -
“Since 2003, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) have consistently reviewed the evidence on abortion and cancer and assessed the research.

“These leading medical experts have consistently and unanimously agreed that the evidence is strong that having an abortion does not increase a woman’s risk of breast cancer.”
https://nwhn.org/abortion-and-breast-cancer-2/

I realize that repeating unfounded and unprovable information is just what you do for fun. And you never admit error or apologize – because you don’t care. But in this case what you’ve done is really too much. I think it amounts to fear mongering, deliberately target women.

Why do you do this? I wonder if it may have something to do with increased risk for alzhiemers and dementia for males over 60…

Dutchess_III's avatar

Also, I call BS on your breast cancer claim @seawulf575. How would it increase breast cancer any more than a miscarriage or a live birth?

SQUEEKY2's avatar

I could care less if rape or incest amounts to 10 or ten thousand, or a million what ever the number the women that this happens to should always have access to a safe abortion.

seawulf575's avatar

@JLoon Isn’t it funny? You tote out articles from “reliable” sources while you want to slam me for not using them. You realize, of course, that one of your sources, the American Cancer Society, is the exact same source I used? In fact it is the same article. What is funny is that the article says that not carrying a full term pregnancy can increase the chances of breast cancer. Then it turns around and says it doesn’t. But thankfully that isn’t the only article out there. It is just one I pulled up. Here is another.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8246284/

There are other issues health and reproductive issues brought on by abortions as well.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6081178/

But the subsequent health hazards you may have are not really discussed before you get an abortion, are they? They certainly don’t enter into the discussion publicly.

Blackwater_Park's avatar

@seawulf575 I think an idea you’re missing here is that pregnancies often can take a dangerous turn making an abortion medically necessary. They also take a toll on the body when they’re going well and can cause long-term health consequences. The list is surprisingly long. Even if there is a small causal link between abortion and cancer and that is a big if, it is far overshadowed by these regular pregnancy complications.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Leave it to @seawulf575 to not have a clue what the links he posts actually say.

jca2's avatar

@Dutchess_III: Maybe he’s naive and thinks that if the baby dies while it’s inside the mother (i.e. miscarriage), the baby doesn’t need help coming out. ~~

JLoon's avatar

@seawulf575 – Yes dear.

I did cite the same American Cancer Society article – because it doesn’t say what you obviously thought it did when used it to make your totally bogus argument. You need to read and actually understand sources before you use them.

The same goes for each one the other publications you reference now. You don’t really get what they mean, because it doesn’t matter to you. You just spew misinformation and congratulate yourself.

One more time: There is no proven correllation between ending pregnancy and increased risk of breast cancer. No credible studies anywhere support that conclusion. Claiming otherwise is dishonest.

What you do in these situations is not debate, it’s just a rant.

Waste someone else’s time.

HP's avatar

You know what is really interesting in this issue of abortion? It’s the refusal of the places howling about “states rights” to admit that this is about the subjugation of women. As with slavery, proponents change the subject from whether the Federal government should be allowed to force a woman to give birth, the states must be allowed the decision instead.

seawulf575's avatar

And what I think everyone believes about me is not true. I’m not a “no abortions” guy. But I am totally against them as an alternative to responsibility up front. You get pregnant from a rape? Absolutely an abortion should be allowed. You get pregnant and it legitimately threatens the life of the mother? Absolutely an abortion should be allowed. Uncle Pervy gets you pregnant? Absolutely an abortion should allowed. But what all of those that use those as a reason to keep things as they are under PPvC are doing it by using scare tactics. The overwhelming percentage of abortions done in this country have absolutely nothing to do with rape or incest, and only a few more have anything to do with mother’s life being endangered.

And no, @HP, it isn’t about subjugation of women. It is about putting the control for this where it belongs…in the states. If you don’t like the laws of the state it is infinitely easier to change them than if it is a federal law. Let me throw a “for instance” at you. There is a lot of screaming about how abortion should be a federal thing and that congress should pass a law about it. So if the Republicans gain control of the House and the Senate (as seems likely) and they decided to take you up on that idea and pass a law that made an abortion a federal crime, would you still feel that was the right place for it?

And @HP as I have stated repeatedly, it IS about pushing responsibility for a pregnancy up front instead of after it happens.

JLeslie's avatar

@seawulf575 Why is the life of a baby born from rape somehow worth less than any other baby that for you it’s ok to abort that fetus? The baby is innocent.

seawulf575's avatar

@JLeslie I would agree with you when you look at it from the baby’s point of view. But the choice of whether to take a chance on pregnancy or not was removed. The mother was not irresponsible, she was a victim. And as such I think there has to be some considerations given. She might very well decide that the child has as much worth as any other. But she might also feel wronged and see the child as a reminder of that wrong for the rest of their lives. So the child might be forced to live, but the mother might never love it. She might give it up for adoption which would be okay, but she might also mentally and/or physically abuse the child. Which would be a shame for both of them.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Guess some babies matter more than others.

JLeslie's avatar

@seawulf575 So, women who can’t fathom taking care of another baby and the child will more than likely suffer some neglect, that baby shouldn’t be allowed to be aborted because the mother chose to have sex and either didn’t use birth control or the birth control failed. That baby should have to grow up in much less than ideal conditions.

Punishing the woman (you would probably say the woman living with the consequences of her actions) is more important than the conditions the child is raised in.

What about the fetus with a severe genetic problem? Should that pregnancy be forced to go to term and the baby be born to a difficult life and the entire family put through difficulties? That’s no fault of the mother.

SQUEEKY2's avatar

Abortion does have it’s place, and I really doubt any woman uses it for just birth control .
As wolfie pointed out he is for it in rape and incest cases,or if the mothers life or health is in great jeopardy, and I respect that.
But as @JLeslie pointed out what about kids with severe genetic problems, or that little 13 year old that caved under pressure from her boyfriend?
What about those cases as well?
In those cases the wishes of the woman has to come first.

HP's avatar

@seawulf575 You don’t realize what you are saying. Of course this is about the subjugation of women. Putting this up front and where it belongs means the decision belongs with THE WOMAN, not the state. To deny women this decision is subjugation, regardlesss of who enforces it. It is in truth a punishment inflicted solely on women for the “crime” of having sex.

seawulf575's avatar

@JLeslie Again, it is the choice. If I were a woman an chose to have unprotected sex, should I then get to blame the baby for how it will impact my life? And yes, women (and men) have unprotected sex. Quite frequently. I found an article that shows it happens far more than people think.

In a rape, the woman is not given that choice. THAT is the difference. And I have to ask: How many abortions do you have to have before you figure out there is a better way to prevent the pregnancy? There are stats out there for that as well. Those stats would surprise you.
https://www.abort73.com/abortion_facts/us_abortion_statistics/

I looked at Florida since FL requires a reason for all medical abortions. if you look at incest, rape, and mother’s life threatened, you are looking at <1% of the total abortions. If you look at fetal abnormality, it is another 1%. In fact, over 95% were done because the person decided they didn’t want the baby. 74% were just elective…no real reason. That is using abortion as a contraceptive device.

So all the arguments about rape and incest or any of those things are really insignificant. They are fear mongering.

seawulf575's avatar

@SQUEEKY2 my problem with the 13 year old is that is a minor. It really shouldn’t be their choice, it should be their parent’s choice at best.

seawulf575's avatar

@HP Yes, the decisions belong to the WOMAN. Did the woman decide to have unprotected sex? Many do. So is their decision making ability really that good? They risk a pregnancy and a STI, but hey, why hold them accountable for their decisions? Better to let them kill a baby. Anything else is subjugation.

JLeslie's avatar

@seawulf575 You forgot over 50% of abortions are done with pills, so that means very early in the pregnancy, and over 90% are done in the first trimester. Florida law allows for abortion in the first trimester for any reason even under DeSantis unless he decides to shift even harder towards catering to the Christian right now.

Actually, the Roe v. Wade decision allowed for states to limit access the second and third trimester, so Roe gives states some autonomy. This undoing by the a Supreme Court if it happens might cause a backlash that will have more permissive abortion laws in the end or in the future.

Just think about all those babies that will be born. Many to lower income women (all classes have abortions, but even teens and very young adults who are in middle class families can be seen as independent and qualify as low income) and just think about the tax burden. My mom told me yesterday that she read almost 50% of children are in the WIC system. That’s your tax dollars.

jca2's avatar

@seawulf575 Your link provided from the Abort 73 site is an “end abortion” site. It’s not likely to be objective or accurate. If anyone wants true and accurate stats on abortion, better to look at a CDC site or government site that will have an accurate compilation of stats and demographics.

HP's avatar

Leave him to flail hopelessly as usual. It’s an argument he can neither win nor defend: the idea that this is somehow (like slavery) a fate that should be determined by the states as opposed to the Federal government. Look at what he writes. He completely misses the point that it is just plain wrong for ANYONE to force a woman to have a child. And to claim that this position has nothing to do with the subjugation of women is just ridiculous on its face. Roe was simply a recognition of that exact fact.

SQUEEKY2's avatar

Making women more responsible for their actions ,wow how about the men that helped them there what about them ?
The right want you to believe these abortions are happening to babies the size of pre schoolers, and we all know late term abortions only happen under dire conditions.

Zaku's avatar

As if pregnancy and other associated natural risks weren’t already more than enough natural consequences for women, the so-called “Christians” are ever eager to provide more . . .

seawulf575's avatar

@JLeslie I haven’t forgotten the chemical abortions. Nor have I forgotten that most happen in the first trimester. However, when the bill that said abortion after 15 weeks was outlawed, those on the left went crazy and most people on these pages swore up and down that women didn’t know they were pregnant at that point. There were all SORTS of scare tactics coming out about that. But if you go back to look at the link I provided about abortion statistics you find that about 95% of all abortions happen within the first 15 weeks. So maybe you need to talk to your fellow Jellies about reality.

But it is interesting that you bring up Roe and then claim this current thing is going to undo all the structure instituted by Roe. Planned Parenthood of PA v Casey took care of that already. RvW had the entire thing split up by trimester. The first trimester allowed a woman to get an abortion with concurrence from her physician. The second trimester had limitations where the state had to be consulted and took into account maternal health. In the third trimester, the viability of the fetus had to be considered and that started taking over the decision. There were other aspects as well such as a married woman needing spousal consent, minor children needing parental consent, a 24 hour waiting period and informed consent. But PPvC did away with much of that. It got rid of the ability of the state to have any say in things, it did away with spousal consent as well. It replaced the fetal viability with the idea of “undue burden”. So in effect PPvC is what is at stake…RvW is mainly no longer meaningful other than being the landmark case that established some legal guidance on abortion.

seawulf575's avatar

@jca2 If you read the link, you would see that they cite the Guttmacher Institute (which is an arm of Planned Parenthood) as well as the CDC. In fact, they show quite a bit of data from the Guttmacher Institute and provide links to it as well. They did show GI poll results but stated that they only polled 1259 post abortive women on their reasons. I was more impressed by the State of Florida data which looked at 74,868 cases.

I felt they did a very fair evaluation, showing several sources for their data, and providing links so the reader can make their own determinations. They didn’t offer opinion as facts.

So rather than just trying to find fault with a source, you might want to actually look at the data.

seawulf575's avatar

@SQUEEKY2 If you look at my answers on this and other related threads, you will see that I don’t excuse men from this equation. However when the conversation is strictly “The WOMAN gets to decide”, then for me to address that is neither inappropriate nor biased.

JLeslie's avatar

@seawulf575 Minor girls needing parental consent and married women needing spousal consent and making all abortions illegal after 15 weeks is all horrible and just the Christian right chipping away at legal abortion. It all also encourages “back alley” abortions.

The majority of women who need or want abortions after 15 weeks wanted to be pregnant and have a baby, but something is going wrong. Taking away their right to end their pregnancy is fairly horrific.

I understand why the court went with viability, because then one can argue the baby is a separate independent being able to sustain its own life, but I also understand why women should always be able to have control over their own bodies.

No exceptions is completely archaic and terrifying in my opinion.

seawulf575's avatar

@JLeslie It’s interesting how we view things differently. I personally believe that a minor should ALWAYS need parental consent for medical treatments, barring life-saving efforts. I believe the efforts to make minors autonomous is nothing but an effort by the left to chip away at the family. It is damaging to society as a whole, to the children specifically, and is terrifying in my opinion. It is also contradictory to the idea of a woman’s right. We say the woman has the right to decide whether or not to have a baby. But if she decides to say she wants a baby we then say it really isn’t hers to raise. Most important decisions will fall to someone else because suddenly the immature child’s opinion is everything. All you have to do is sway the impressionable child to some point of view and the parent’s have no say. How is that NOT terrifying?

Spousal consent is another interesting one. I actually don’t have a problem with this per se. There are enough abusive relationships out there that this could be dangerous. But interestingly, when I got a vasectomy I was required to get written spousal consent. The doctor would not proceed with out it. The story was that if I had the procedure done without her permission it could negatively impact our marriage and they weren’t allowed to put themselves in that position. Apparently it wasn’t my body my decision. Just different for guys I guess. It didn’t matter because I had already discussed it with my wife (now ex). But I find it really interesting how the rules are different.

And the 15 week limit, as I have already pointed out, accounts for over 95% of all abortions currently. There is nothing Christian chipping away at anything. The women who get to make the choice have mainly said this is fine.

JLeslie's avatar

@seawulf575 The late term abortions are usually women who WANT a baby. You condemn them to finishing a bad pregnancy and MONTHS of being pregnant before they can try for another pregnancy that will be successful, and they have to be physically pregnant with a baby that cannot live in the end. Do you want to be forced to have something growing inside of you, causing you discomfort and medical problems and as it grows it will be harder and more painful to birth or remove and create more risk to your health? Do you want your wife or daughter to go through that if they don’t want to?

If the fetus has a severe deformity or abnormality it often isn’t discovered until 4–5 months into the pregnancy. We are getting better at that. Everyone wants these type of things to be able to be discovered early in pregnancies. Women don’t want to go through later term abortions.

Regarding teenagers. You don’t seem to get that one of the the pro-choice’s movement’s primary goal is SAFE abortions. The religious right hope these pregnant teens will decide not to get an abortion if their parents are told.

If you make it a crime to do abortions or even just after 15 week abortions, there won’t be doctors to end pregnancies that need to be ended. That type of medical care will simple cease to exist. Women will be TRAPPED IN THEIR BODIES. Left to die in some cases. Labor to death or forced to complete pregnancies that harm them in some other way. Doctors worrying about being taken to court for ending an ectopic pregnancy or any other situation that they might come under scrutiny and have to prove to the “religious police” the termination of pregnancy they performed was necessary.

The problem is you can’t seem to imagine what it is like to be pregnant and especially you can’t imagine being pregnant and something going wrong. Women suffer, literally like a torture, and die. You seem to think of pregnancy like the most natural thing in the world no big deal.

Maternal death in Muslim countries is very high. No surprise.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther