I am whatever I am when I am it.

loving whoever you are when the stars shine and whoever you'll be when the sun rises

Posts tagged abortion

43,897 notes

Let me tell you some things.

I used to investigate child abuse and neglect. I can tell you how to stop the vast majority of abortion in the world.

First, make knowledge and access to contraception widely available. Start teaching kids before they hit puberty. Teach them about domestic violence and coercion, and teach them not to coerce and rape. Create a strong, loving community where women and girls feel safe and supported in times of need. Because guess what? They aren’t. You know what happens to babies born under such circumstances? They get hurt, unnecessarily. They get sick, unnecessarily. They get removed from parents who love them but who are unprepared for the burden of a child. Resources? Honey, we try. There aren’t enough resources anywhere. There are waiting lists, and promises, and maybes. If the government itself can’t hook people up, what makes you think an impoverished single mom can handle it?

Abolish poverty. Do you have any idea how much childcare costs? Daycare can cost as much or more than monthly rent. They may be inadequately staffed. Getting a private nanny is a nice idea, but they don’t come cheap either. Relatives? Do they own a car? Does the bus run at the right times? Do they have jobs of their own they need to work just to keep the lights on? Are they going to stick around until you get off you convenience store shift at 4 AM? Do they have criminal histories that will make them unsuitable as caregivers when CPS pokes around? You gonna pay for that? Who’s going to pay for that?

End rape. I know your type errs on the side of blaming the woman, but I’ve seen little girls who’ve barely gotten their periods pregnant because somebody thought raping preteens was an awesome idea. You want to put a child through that? Or someone with a mental or physical inability for whom pregnancy would be frightening, painful or even life-threatening? I’ve seen nonverbal kids who had their feet sliced up by caregivers for no fucking reason at all, you think sexual abuse doesn’t happen either?

You say there’s lots of couples who want to adopt. Kiddo, what they want to adopt are healthy white babies, preferably untainted by the wombs and genetics of women with alcohol or drug dependencies. I’ve seen the kids they don’t want, who almost no one wants. You people focus only on the happy pink babies, the gigglers, the ones who grow and grow with no trouble. Those are not the kids who linger in foster care. Those are certainly not the older kids and teenagers who age out of foster care and then are thrown out in the streets, usually with an array of medical and mental health issues. Are they too old to count?

And yeah, I’ve seen the babies, little hand-sized things barely clinging to life. There’s no glory, no wonder there. There is no wonder in a pregnant woman with five dollars to her name, so deep in depression you wonder if she’ll be alive in a week. Therapy costs money. Medicine costs money. Food, clothes, electricity cost money. Government assistance is a pittance; poverty drives women and girls into situations where they are forced to rely on people who abuse them to survive. (I’ve been up in more hospitals than I can count.)

In each and every dark pit of desperation, I have never seen a pro-lifer. I ain’t never seen them babysitting, scrubbing floors, bringing over goods, handing mom $50 bucks a month or driving her to the pediatrician. I ain’t never seen them sitting up for hours with an autistic child who screams and rages so his mother can get some sleep while she rests up from working 14-hour days. I don’t see them fixing leaks in rundown houses or playing with a kid while the police prepare to interview her about her sexual abuse. They’re not paying for the funerals of babies and children who died after birth, when they truly do become independent organisms. And the crazy thing is they think they’ve already done their job, because the child was born!

Aphids give birth, girl. It’s no miracle. You want to speak for the weak? Get off your high horse and get your hands dirty helping the poor, the isolated, the ill and mentally ill women and mothers and their children who already breathe the dirty air. You are doing nothing, absolutely nothing, for children. You don’t have a flea’s comprehension of injustice. You are not doing shit for life until you get in there and fight that darkness. Until you understand that abortion is salvation in a world like ours. Does that sound too hard? Do you really think suffering post-birth is more permissible, less worthy of outrage?

“Pro-life” is simply a philosophy in which the only life worth saving is the one that can be saved by punishing a woman.

In reply to a ‘pro-life’ blogger: STFU, Conservatives: When I say I’m pro-life… (via grrrltalk) emphasis mine. (via fuckyeahfeminists)

(via thisspinsterlife)

Filed under abortion rape rape culture misogyny youth violence against women classism racism

268 notes

The Cuntmentality: This is seriously happening right now. [TW: forced pregnancy, reproductive coercion]

lucypaw:

jadelyn:

hopelessly-romantic-cynic:

jadelyn:

dailymurf:

nounbeast:

My spouse works in phlebotomy.

As part of an ice-breaker while he preps the tourniquet, tubes and needle, he casually asks why his patients are there. Obviously it doesn’t require an answer…

terrifying.

(Source: nounbeast, via cephalopodqueen)

Filed under abortion reproductive rights reproductive coercion pro-choice

33 notes

keepyourboehneroutofmyuterus:

This meme of Cantor says:

I want to “eliminate government funding for any and all organizations that perform” cancer screenings. Doesn’t have the same ring to it, does it?

Early today, at the Values Voter summit:

But what ultimately won Cantor a standing ovation was a proposal to  “eliminate government funding for any and all organizations that perform  abortions.” This effort – largely aimed at defunding Planned  Parenthood, which receives more than $300 million annually for its  family planning and reproductive health services – has already begun  with the House’s recent introduction of a controversial Labor, Health  and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies appropriations bill (PDF).

keepyourboehneroutofmyuterus:

This meme of Cantor says:

I want to “eliminate government funding for any and all organizations that perform” cancer screenings. Doesn’t have the same ring to it, does it?

Early today, at the Values Voter summit:

But what ultimately won Cantor a standing ovation was a proposal to “eliminate government funding for any and all organizations that perform abortions.” This effort – largely aimed at defunding Planned Parenthood, which receives more than $300 million annually for its family planning and reproductive health services – has already begun with the House’s recent introduction of a controversial Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies appropriations bill (PDF).

(Source: keepyourbsoutofmyuterus)

Filed under planned parenthood abortion cancer screenings pap smears reproductive rights

3,294 notes

Cynical Idealism: You're not Pro-Choice, you're just Pro-Death.

esmeweatherwax:

tehsunshine:

nathanisamazing:

inherhipstheresrevolutions:

nathanisamazing:

depressingfacts:

You’re not pro-life, you’re just pro-70,000-deaths-a-year-from-unsafe-abortions.

You’re just pro-stripping-people-of-their-bodily-autonomy.

You’re just pro-flood-the-system-with-kids-who-won’t-get-adopted-and-who-we-can’t-afford-to-feed-or-provide-shelter-for.

You’re just pro-fuck-you-anybody-with-a-uterus. 

You’re just a fucking asshole is what I’m trying to say really.

Unfortunate that abortion is killing a human.

Moral consequences on your head be.

Abortion doesn’t kill A human. It kills human cells forming to create a potential human being.

You’re A human until you are a human being i.e born, autonomously living and completely separate from someone elses body - a fetus is living inside someone’s womb, they are not separate.

Hi.

I study Biology at the University of Melbourne.

There is no way to morally or legally rationalise the point at which something becomes an organism. It’s pretty black-and-white.

The instant a the two haploid gametes of a diploid organism fuse together, you have a new diploid organism.

Ergo, you are killing a member of Homo sapiens.

You just have to justify killing (or murdering, depending on your point of view) a human that isn’t yet fully formed, cognitional or sentient.

Also, since you’re not even one of my followers, you should really just stop being argumentative and piss off.

Regards,

Nathan.

Hey, Nathan

I really love completing patterns, so as long as we’re sharing credentials that don’t really matter in the discussion of reproductive rights, I’d like to share that I am a Chemistry, Biochemistry, and Biology triple major with a concentration in Genetics at Ball State University. (It’s cool, you can laugh at my school name. I won’t get mad).

I’m four credits away from my chemistry degrees (second semester physical chemistry), and six credits away from my biology degree (botany and methods of ecology), so I’m pretty qualified to speak about issues of genetics, biochemistry, molecular biology, and eukaryotic development. But I’m actually not going to get too deep into the subjects I know extremely well because it’s just not necessary at this point.

First off, you said “The instant a the two haploid gametes of a diploid organism fuse together, you have a new diploid organism.” This technically is not true. There are a myriad of steps that take place during fertilization, and most of them occur after the sperm has attached to the oocyte. First and foremost, the oocyte must undergo meiosis II. At the “moment of conception,” as anti-choicers love to wax poetic about, the oocyte has 46 chromosomes and is entirely incapable of developing into the progeny.

While the oocyte busies itself with its second meiotic division, the sperm’s cellular body must degenerate. The tail, mitochondria, and most of its cellular components are digested, leaving only the sperm’s genomic DNA in a pronucleus. The pronuclei of both the ovum and sperm then undergo very rapid DNA replication (while still separate!) in order to prepare for mitosis as a zygote.

Eventually, the pronucleic membranes dissolve, allowing a mitotic spindle to develop. The spindle simultaneously combines maternal and paternal chromosomes while completing the first mitotic division of the new progeny. This is the first point at which the genomic DNA of both the male and female parent meet, and therefore this is the first point at which a progeny exists with an original complement of 46 chromosomes.

Anyway, that’s the only science I wanted to get into. My real point follows ahead.

Yes, the above zygote with 46 combined chromosomes is a member of Homo sapiens sapiens. To suggest otherwise would be silly- it’s certainly not Oxytricha or Stylonychia (primarily because both of those are far more complex than a human zygote). However, the argument at hand is whether or not that two-celled human is or is not a person with all of the rights and responsibilities of a developed and born human.

It is logically impossible to argue that two people with equal rights can occupy the same body. With two people (the zygote and the pregnant person, by your argument) sharing one body, the rights of both cannot be equally preserved. Either the pregnant person retains the right they ordinarily hold to make choices about their body or the zygote overrides that right.

So let’s talk about rights. A really touchy subject in medical ethics today is organ and tissue donation. Many laypeople think that donation compatibility, whether live or cadaver, is purely a function of ABO blood group. Unfortunately, this is not the case. There are multiple factors to compatibility, most of them genetically determined, and these factors are often so limiting that a person in need of a transplant is only compatible with one family member (if that).

Fortunately, some of our most commonly needed organs can be given by a live donor. More than half of all organ donations are given by live donors and include kidney, lung, skin, and liver tissues. These donations are almost always life-saving for the recipient.

So say your sister needs a kidney. She has been on dialysis for quite some time and her systems are failing. Without a new kidney, she will not survive the month. National databases have been scoured, your entire family and social circle has been tested, and you are the only compatible match. Are you morally obligated to give her your kidney? She will certainly die without it, but organ donation kind of sucks. I mean, it normally goes okay with minimal complications, but it’s painful and inconvenient and expensive and you will need to take time off work. Should there be a law dictating that you must give that kidney in order to save her life?

Most individuals I have spoken to say “no.” One went so far to say “giving her the kidney would be morally laudable but not morally imperative.” So let’s bring it back to abortion. 99.8% of abortions (and 100% of “elective” abortions) take place before 21 weeks gestation. The medical community has established that premature infants have virtually little chance of survival outside the uterus until approximately 24 weeks gestation, so all elective abortions are performed before fetal viability.

Embryos and fetuses prior to 24 weeks gestation cannot survive without using a pregnant person’s body as a host. An abortion serves to stop the donation of the host body to the progeny. Think about your answer to your sister’s kidney dilemma and answer: should a pregnant person be obligated to donate their body to a parasitic organism that will die without it?

At this point many anti-choicers respond with “well, she chose to have sex. You didn’t make your sister exist,” and this is completely true. So let’s change the scenario: your mother is the only match for your sister’s kidney, and it is absolutely her fault that your sister exists and is alive today. It may even be her fault (genetically or environmentally) that your sister needs a new kidney! Should she be legally obligated to give her body to save your sister?

So, to get back to your original statement, “abortion is murder,” I must ask: if you or your mother said no to your sister and she dies, are you a murderer?

If not, neither are people who get abortions.

Best wishes,

Erin.

(We are still doing the passive-aggressive letter bit, right?)

Damn.

Filed under abortion pro-choice biology SCIENCE: it works

66 notes

One thing you’ll hear lawmakers on both sides of the abortion debate say again and again is that federal money shouldn’t be used to pay for abortions. There’s no reason that taypayer money shouldn’t fund a legal medical procedure, but thanks to the Hyde Amendment, which just turned 35, most Americans don’t question that logic.
35th Anniversary Of The Hyde Amendment Is Nothing To Celebrate (via bibliofeminista)

(via loveyourchaos)

Filed under hyde amendment abortion women's health women's rights