I knew it was only a matter of time before they tried to nefariously use the systems in place when a woman relinquishes a child for adoption.
Currently, you cannot adopt a fetus and women have rights up to and after delivery.No doubt they also want to take those rights away so (white,”Christians”) would be able to adopt a 6-week-old embryo.
There is a march in DC on Friday to support the Equal Rights Amendment which is languishing for Biden to publish. We will livestream the event on Instagram (@VoteEqualityUS) beginning at 4:30 PM. Here are other details for this call to action to help protect us from Trump.
It is at the point where I feel that the best thing we could do is start funding American women of child bearing years to leave the US and find life in a place where they can live in reproductive safety. https://reproductiverights.org/maps/worlds-abortion-laws/
To start such a movement would be frightening to the incoming administration because their administration is largely based on men controlling women's bodies. When I looked it up the figure of child bearing women was over 63 million people. They were counting ages 15-45. Now, some will not be child bearing, and it would be a different sort of punishment to women to uproot them, but it would have the effect of forcing the remaining men, in a country that is no longer respecting women, to either choose to follow the women, or to stay and just be incels. The USA is unsafe for women whatever their age, but with a governmental model that views women as birthing machines and has regard for our lives, we should immigrate to places that offer us better health care and more personal autonomy. Right now it might just mean moving from a Red State to a Blue State, but we are moving in the direction where it might need to be more drastic than that.
Why do they count “women” of child bearing age starting at 15 when most menstruation starts much younger? Don’t girls of nine or ten matter? Especially given that they want little girls to carry their rapist’s spawn.
I think they are assuming that younger girls are not choosing to be in sexual relationships, but I agree child bearing is younger. However, at 15 I can see girls being able to leave on their own, sans family.
I was thinking if tens of millions of women leave, men will follow. That will mess up the society and economy, particularly with a policy of not letting in immigrants. It would be interesting if the Trump administration turned the US into a country to exodus from instead of immigrate to.
At 15, she can’t sign a lease and she can’t get a regular drivers license so she would have to be in a place where they had good public transport or lie about her age or just break the law. And since she can’t legally sign a lease, housing is a big problem.
They give the game away when they concede that abortion is a medical procedure. If abortion = medical procedure, that’s the end of the story— HIPPA applies and it’s nobody’s business what the end is. And steps are always taken to ensure informed and voluntary consent. They have some nerve to claim that abortion is coerced and being forced to carry a child or a fatally compromised fetus to term, or relinquishing a child for adoption is not. Unless your definition of coercion is when lawmakers and theocrats are forced to concede women’s bodily autonomy.
The Turnaway Study (worth finding and reading) determined that women DON’T regret their abortions. BUT they DO regret giving up their children for adoption.
calls for states to provide the federal government with detailed reports on every abortion performed or prescribed in the state. Those that don’t could lose Medicaid funding.
Detailed reports, you say? Well, we all know how “problematic” reporting can be… Things get misfiled; mistakes are made; files go missing; extraneous information is inserted. We might not even be using the same definitions. I mean, who’s to say that those were even abortions instead of expedited births or routine uterine cleaning. There could be many ways to approach this, since Louisiana seems allowed to redefine a scheduled narcotic. I don’t think the federal government wants to judge California for making some minor adjustments to their reporting. Comply, with the same level of honesty that Texas is employing or Idaho where women are apparently just fine NOT being given life saving “maternal fetal separations”. Since medicine is not only a science but also an art, let’s get creative. Flood them with details; and no glossary of terms. Comply, but with pizzazz.
I will try to make this quick. These menz and their toady womenz are actively trying to kill as many women as possible, until the rest of us are so traumatized that we will submit to their White Christisn Taliban. Sisters of all nations, it is time for us to take our lives, our loves and our futures away from men. Period. These thugs have forced their narratives and their definitions of who we are down our throats for WAY too long. And the problem is that we have been raised on their narratives...in churches...in schools...in every damn area of life. How long will it be, with this idiotic idea about 'parental rights,' before we realize that, in fact, like the ancient Greeks, they believe that the only true parent is the father? Let's not kid ourselves into believing that they are concerned with mother rights. The parental rights they are so freaked out about are the supposed rights of the sperm. And since the little swimmies are so very special, we walking receptacles and incubators must not be allowed to kill the little dudes and the homonculus they plant. Even who we think and feel ourselves to be is full of their narratives and definitions. They even created religious structures and doctrines to convince us that it is 'gods' will that we submit. It is time that we walk away from the menz and focus on our own lives. Not easy, but women have done it before. The only men with whom we should share any of our lives should be those whose friendship and respect are proven.
Thank you, Jessica, for all your work sorting through the language issue. It must be so exhausting. The coerced abortion argument would seem like a trip down the dark rabbit hole of nonsense except for the fact that we have a Supreme Court full of extremist Catholics who are willing to twist their logic any which way to achieve their preconceived conclusion. Again, thank you for keeping us up to date on all this.
Re coerced abortion, there is an analogy here to the arguments against medical aid in dying. One of the key arguments is that people who are terminally ill and want to plan their death might be coerced into doing so (the fact that we have seen virtually no coercion in practice in the states that have had this law on the books for years is irrelevant). The result is a series of safeguards in the law and ultimately opposition to the law on the basis that no matter what safeguards are put in, there might be coercion. In other words, those who oppose medical aid in dying are trying to protect patients. Similarly, all that abortion opponents say they are doing is trying to protect women (whether they like it or not).
They insist that things are 'children' which are not, and of course we resist that, but doesn't that also preclude us from making some of our best legal arguments? Where is there _any_ other circumstance in which a person has a right to another person's body? There isn't. They would have to justify this exception. I would guess that they would call it some sort of parental responsibility (although who knows with these people), but then they have to prove consent to parenthood. What's the answer? Force them to explicitly say that it just happens, that there's nothing a woman can do about it, that she has no legal recourse, and have to justify that.
The Dobbs opinion is notorious for barely mentioning the pregnant woman. That's exactly the way conservatives want it; they need the woman to be legally invisible. Above all we need strategies to force the visibility. Make them say loudly and clearly that their legal theory is that women are slaves with no rights, instead of letting them obfuscate the matter. Make it crystal clear to the American people.
Exactly! This is why birth mothers have rights up to and after delivery. As I just commented,they want to take those rights away so a 6-week old embryo could be adopted. And of course,all women lose any right to choose.
So many sickening things in this post. The shortened Leavitt talking point. The Manchurian Candidate-like praise for the CPC. Haunting.
Very well. How about coerced parenthood then? Can we make that a thing?
I knew it was only a matter of time before they tried to nefariously use the systems in place when a woman relinquishes a child for adoption.
Currently, you cannot adopt a fetus and women have rights up to and after delivery.No doubt they also want to take those rights away so (white,”Christians”) would be able to adopt a 6-week-old embryo.
Here’s an article in the Washington Post explaining how Notre Dame has become a breeding ground for the Heritage Foundation and the Supreme Court:
https://wapo.st/3CIweMb
As long as women are empowered to decide what happens with their bodies, no one can be said to force them to give up any rights.
There is a march in DC on Friday to support the Equal Rights Amendment which is languishing for Biden to publish. We will livestream the event on Instagram (@VoteEqualityUS) beginning at 4:30 PM. Here are other details for this call to action to help protect us from Trump.
https://mailchi.mp/f5bd7f2847e2/era-in-the-news-may-8-11035222?e=ee91ff22af
It is at the point where I feel that the best thing we could do is start funding American women of child bearing years to leave the US and find life in a place where they can live in reproductive safety. https://reproductiverights.org/maps/worlds-abortion-laws/
To start such a movement would be frightening to the incoming administration because their administration is largely based on men controlling women's bodies. When I looked it up the figure of child bearing women was over 63 million people. They were counting ages 15-45. Now, some will not be child bearing, and it would be a different sort of punishment to women to uproot them, but it would have the effect of forcing the remaining men, in a country that is no longer respecting women, to either choose to follow the women, or to stay and just be incels. The USA is unsafe for women whatever their age, but with a governmental model that views women as birthing machines and has regard for our lives, we should immigrate to places that offer us better health care and more personal autonomy. Right now it might just mean moving from a Red State to a Blue State, but we are moving in the direction where it might need to be more drastic than that.
Why do they count “women” of child bearing age starting at 15 when most menstruation starts much younger? Don’t girls of nine or ten matter? Especially given that they want little girls to carry their rapist’s spawn.
I think they are assuming that younger girls are not choosing to be in sexual relationships, but I agree child bearing is younger. However, at 15 I can see girls being able to leave on their own, sans family.
I was thinking if tens of millions of women leave, men will follow. That will mess up the society and economy, particularly with a policy of not letting in immigrants. It would be interesting if the Trump administration turned the US into a country to exodus from instead of immigrate to.
At 15, she can’t sign a lease and she can’t get a regular drivers license so she would have to be in a place where they had good public transport or lie about her age or just break the law. And since she can’t legally sign a lease, housing is a big problem.
No, but she can go to an international boarding school. I have seen ones in Germany that are cheaper with board than many private schools in the USA.
https://smapse.com/institut-schloss-wittgenstein/
https://smapse.com/stiftung-louisenlund-private-school/
https://smapse.com/heidelberg-private-school-center-germany/
https://smapse.com/nordsee-internat-nordse-school/
https://smapse.com/private-boarding-school-germany-heimschule-kloster-wald/
Here is a link for Ireland. https://www.boardingschoolsireland.com/tag/schools/
Here is a link for France. https://www.expatica.com/fr/education/children-education/boarding-schools-in-france-2172921/
Several countries
https://world-schools.com/the-best-boarding-schools-in-europe/
They give the game away when they concede that abortion is a medical procedure. If abortion = medical procedure, that’s the end of the story— HIPPA applies and it’s nobody’s business what the end is. And steps are always taken to ensure informed and voluntary consent. They have some nerve to claim that abortion is coerced and being forced to carry a child or a fatally compromised fetus to term, or relinquishing a child for adoption is not. Unless your definition of coercion is when lawmakers and theocrats are forced to concede women’s bodily autonomy.
The Turnaway Study (worth finding and reading) determined that women DON’T regret their abortions. BUT they DO regret giving up their children for adoption.
calls for states to provide the federal government with detailed reports on every abortion performed or prescribed in the state. Those that don’t could lose Medicaid funding.
Detailed reports, you say? Well, we all know how “problematic” reporting can be… Things get misfiled; mistakes are made; files go missing; extraneous information is inserted. We might not even be using the same definitions. I mean, who’s to say that those were even abortions instead of expedited births or routine uterine cleaning. There could be many ways to approach this, since Louisiana seems allowed to redefine a scheduled narcotic. I don’t think the federal government wants to judge California for making some minor adjustments to their reporting. Comply, with the same level of honesty that Texas is employing or Idaho where women are apparently just fine NOT being given life saving “maternal fetal separations”. Since medicine is not only a science but also an art, let’s get creative. Flood them with details; and no glossary of terms. Comply, but with pizzazz.
I will try to make this quick. These menz and their toady womenz are actively trying to kill as many women as possible, until the rest of us are so traumatized that we will submit to their White Christisn Taliban. Sisters of all nations, it is time for us to take our lives, our loves and our futures away from men. Period. These thugs have forced their narratives and their definitions of who we are down our throats for WAY too long. And the problem is that we have been raised on their narratives...in churches...in schools...in every damn area of life. How long will it be, with this idiotic idea about 'parental rights,' before we realize that, in fact, like the ancient Greeks, they believe that the only true parent is the father? Let's not kid ourselves into believing that they are concerned with mother rights. The parental rights they are so freaked out about are the supposed rights of the sperm. And since the little swimmies are so very special, we walking receptacles and incubators must not be allowed to kill the little dudes and the homonculus they plant. Even who we think and feel ourselves to be is full of their narratives and definitions. They even created religious structures and doctrines to convince us that it is 'gods' will that we submit. It is time that we walk away from the menz and focus on our own lives. Not easy, but women have done it before. The only men with whom we should share any of our lives should be those whose friendship and respect are proven.
Happy Thanksgiving, Jessica!
Wow, we have new twisted versions of anti abortion lies, looking at you MN.
Who lifted the rocks up and let the denizens out.
Elon Musk is a genuinely creepy man. He seems to be obsessed with procreation. Offering his sperm to people he barely knows is beyond odd.
Yes. I do suppose though that it would make sense for the richest person on the planet to be the worst person on the planet.
Thank you, Jessica, for all your work sorting through the language issue. It must be so exhausting. The coerced abortion argument would seem like a trip down the dark rabbit hole of nonsense except for the fact that we have a Supreme Court full of extremist Catholics who are willing to twist their logic any which way to achieve their preconceived conclusion. Again, thank you for keeping us up to date on all this.
Re coerced abortion, there is an analogy here to the arguments against medical aid in dying. One of the key arguments is that people who are terminally ill and want to plan their death might be coerced into doing so (the fact that we have seen virtually no coercion in practice in the states that have had this law on the books for years is irrelevant). The result is a series of safeguards in the law and ultimately opposition to the law on the basis that no matter what safeguards are put in, there might be coercion. In other words, those who oppose medical aid in dying are trying to protect patients. Similarly, all that abortion opponents say they are doing is trying to protect women (whether they like it or not).
Yes, it's much the same thing. Denying bodily autonomy through a myth of coercion. They take the same approach to gender affirming care.
Great point. There is a common thread here.
They are simply sadists who want everyone to suffer because THEIR religion supposedly says so. Fuck them and the horse they rode in on.
In short, the opposition wants to treat women as incompetent to make decisions about their own lives.
They insist that things are 'children' which are not, and of course we resist that, but doesn't that also preclude us from making some of our best legal arguments? Where is there _any_ other circumstance in which a person has a right to another person's body? There isn't. They would have to justify this exception. I would guess that they would call it some sort of parental responsibility (although who knows with these people), but then they have to prove consent to parenthood. What's the answer? Force them to explicitly say that it just happens, that there's nothing a woman can do about it, that she has no legal recourse, and have to justify that.
The Dobbs opinion is notorious for barely mentioning the pregnant woman. That's exactly the way conservatives want it; they need the woman to be legally invisible. Above all we need strategies to force the visibility. Make them say loudly and clearly that their legal theory is that women are slaves with no rights, instead of letting them obfuscate the matter. Make it crystal clear to the American people.
TL;DR: fetal personhood - So what?
Yes. The constitution clearly states "born" not a clump of half developed cells.
Exactly! This is why birth mothers have rights up to and after delivery. As I just commented,they want to take those rights away so a 6-week old embryo could be adopted. And of course,all women lose any right to choose.