Your first logical take down of baby murderers is a quote from a fictional character in an outdated novel? Bravo.
“Most pro-lifers are men and will never have a uterus!”
Well, that’s funny…because 64% of the people who like Created Equal’s Facebook page are women.
No, you are quoting wrong, and the quote that you are referring to is usually in reference to the fact that most of the people writing legislation on abortion and seeking to limit the choices pregnant people are allowed to make about their bodies are men, not about who likes your shitty little Facebook page.
My friend just posted this on facebook…
This makes me very sad and sick to my stomach
Yeah, well, the person who posted this graphic is posting misleading propaganda and you should take it with a grain of salt and trust the women (and people, since people who also identify other as women also receive abortion procedures and they do not deserve to be left out) who decide an abortion procedure is right for them and their life.
The Inner Machinations Of My Mind: Abortion.
Being pro-life does not mean you’re sexist.
Whoever decided to throw that analogy out there should be punched multiple times in the face.
Like really? What?
I hate abortion. I see it as the destruction of the process of life, which, to me, is the most basic fundamental miracle of the universe.
Fundamental miracle? hmmm. Here’s the thing, kid: It is sexist, but in some cases, like yours, it’s not a commissive sexism, it’s more of an omissive sexism. In other words, you don’t necessarily consider yourself morally superior based on your gender identification, but your views express that.
See, here’s the real illusion about abortion that both the pro-choice and anti-choice sides are pushing: That the choice is up for debate. The choice exists, there’s no stopping that. The debate is over who gets to make it. People who are pro-choice support the individual’s right to make decisions regarding their bodies. People who call themselves pro-life are in favor of the government making the decision. You can call it a immoral and come up with reasons and justifications all day long and it’s a fun exercise in rhetoric, but at the end of the day there’s only one thing really up for debate here: Who’s choice is it, the individual’s or the government’s?
Let me add this: If it’s the government’s decision and not the individuals than should it not also be the government’s decision to donate one of your kidney’s to a needy relative? Say mom has two good kidneys and, through know fault of her own, daughters are failing. Shouldn’t the government prevent, what you see as, the destruction of life by forcing mom to give one of the good kidneys to save daughters life? If daughter dies because mom made the choice to keep the kidney, we can call it immoral and grandstand and feel better about ourselves, but if government makes the choice, …well, how do we feel about ourselves then?
(Also, quick note of acknowledgment that abortion rights apply to anyone with a uterus, that includes trans-men and girls, not just women).
Bolded for emphasis, yo
This is not a shirt about gun control. It’s simply a response to the fact that when children are victims of gun violence the world is outraged. When children are the victims of abortion violence, the world barely notices.
Are you advocating for the shooting of women seeking abortions? Because that’s what it seems like. I mean, logically, if a person were to be shot into with intent to induce an abortion, their insides would be all kinds of fucked up. Is that what you want? People to die for exercising their bodily rights? Dang.
Ron Paul: Against A Woman’s Right to Choose
As an OB/GYN who delivered over 4,000 babies, Ron Paul knows firsthand how precious, fragile, and in need of protection life is.
Dr. Paul’s experience in science and medicine only reinforced his belief that life begins at conception, and he believes it would be inconsistent for him to champion personal liberty and a free society if he didn’t also advocate respecting the God-given right to life—for those born and unborn.
After being forced to witness an abortion being performed during his time in medical school, he knew from that moment on that his practice would focus on protecting life. And during his years in medicine, never once did he find an abortion necessary to save the life of a pregnant woman.
As a physician, Ron Paul consistently put his beliefs into practice and saved lives by helping women seek options other than abortion, including adoption. And as President, Ron Paul will continue to fight for the same pro-life solutions he has upheld in Congress, including:
* Immediately saving lives by effectively repealing Roe v. Wade and preventing activist judges from interfering with state decisions on life by removing abortion from federal court jurisdiction through legislation modeled after his “We the People Act.”
* Defining life as beginning at conception by passing a “Sanctity of Life Act.”
Because he agrees with Thomas Jefferson that it is “sinful and tyrannical” to “compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors,” Ron Paul will also protect the American people’s freedom of conscience by working to prohibit taxpayer funds from being used for abortions, Planned Parenthood, or any other so-called “family planning” program.
The strength of love for liberty in our society can be judged by how we treat the most innocent among us. It’s time to elect a President with the courage and conviction to stand up for every American’s right to life.
* Yeah, too bad repealing Roe v Wade won’t really save lives, and actually destroy more.
* Yeah, too bad defining life as beginning at conception will create a whole slew of human rights problems/violations.
* Yeah, too bad taxpayer funds are already barred from being used for abortions, how is this even still a thing? The Hyde Amendment is pretty much common knowledge for anyone even dipping their toes into the abortion debate and yet they still peddle this whole “no taxpayer funded abortions!” bullshit. How is it people can be so infuriated by the thought of their tax dollars going towards “killing babies” here in the states but a-okay with their tax dollars being used to kill actual babies as well as children and adults in our wars? Why is it Ron Paul only wants people to be able to pull their tax dollars from contributing to family planning? Is he going to give this option for everything people don’t agree with? Will I be able to opt out of funding American wars? Will I be able to choose to put all my tax dollars into family planning if I want? If not, why not? Oh my god, the irony here is about to blow my brain out of my skull.
So cute. :)
I love when people think this image is cute because something like this would probably be life threatening in real life. I’m sure it’d be cute when this person is rushed to the hospital, too. I’m really sure it’d be even cuter when they are dying because the fetus’s foot just ripped through quite a few layers of abdominal tissue just to show you it’s totally normal sized for a fetus’s footprint. It’s all just so cute.
