A 16-Year-Old Responds To A "Teen Vogue" Article About What To Get A Friend After Her Abortion

Submitted by: 5cats 3 weeks ago Lifestyle


This is Autumn, 16, with an organization called Students for Life. She addresses an article that was recently published in Teen Vogue titled, "What to Get Your Friend Post-Abortion." 

The slideshow suggests gifts to get a friend who's had an abortion. Like it's a Bat Mitzvah or a birthday party, how ironic. Her arguments are concise, absolutely correct and eloquently stated. She really gets rolling at around the 5 minute mark, but watch the whole thing.

Whether you agree or disagree with abortion, that's irrelevant -- this girl is addressing the flippant tone of the article, not abortion itself. 
There are 84 comments:
Male 38,058
16? 16 years old? Damn over achiever 
0
Reply
Male 2,668
Then, sweetie, don't get you one. 
Meanwhile, what other women choose is, whaddayacallit? - Oh yeah, none of your fucking business.
4
Reply
Male 38,058
captkangaroo Stand up, it went right over your head
0
Reply
Male 37,042
captkangaroo You've missed the point entirely, as you usually do.
-2
Reply
Male 163
captkangaroo well said
2
Reply
Male 37,042
theman01 It has nothing to do with the 'right or wrong' of abortion and is about the idiotic article printed in Teen Vogue. So YES it is her business since the article is aimed at her...
-3
Reply
Male 2,668
5cats 
Contrary for contrary's sake - I get it.
1
Reply
Male 37,042
captkangaroo Yes, you certainly are! 
Where does she say anything like what you accuse her of saying? You are wrong as you usually are, so stfu already.
-3
Reply
Male 2,668
5cats 
I did not accuse her of saying anything, you dunderhead.
Fuck off, asshole.

2
Reply
Male 37,042
captkangaroo Then, sweetie, don't get you one.

What is that? You're accusing her of arguing about abortion, not about what she really is discussing, the article

what other women choose is, whaddayacallit? - Oh yeah, none of your fucking business.

Except she isn't, as you've twice accused her in just 2 sentences, talking about abortion, she's talking about the article. It is her business, as the article is directed at her, a teen.

You are so blind you cannot even see past your own stupidity. You didn't bother to watch it, just assumed it was anti-abortion and thus attacked her based on your wrong assumption. How sad it must be... to be you. :-(
-3
Reply
Male 2,668
5cats 
Blah, blah, blah. Your argument is as weak as it is invalid.
1
Reply
Male 37,042
captkangaroo Says someone who didn't even watch the video...
-2
Reply
Male 2,668
5cats 
Now you are just trolling.
0
Reply
Male 37,042
captkangaroo That isn't trolling. Look at the actual IAB trolls and you can easily see the difference. Need a list? There are so many...
-1
Reply
Male 2,668
5cats 
It's pretty well accepted that you are a troll, 5cats. And an asshole. And needlessly argumentative. And quite willing to draw out your pointless arguments.

0
Reply
Male 37,042
captkangaroo You call them pointless because you know I'm correct and you cannot refute it. :shrugs: Oh well, your loss.
But trolling is entirely different. Get your facts straight at least, sheesh how lame is making shit up to attack others? You can't even face the truth, you need to make things up? Weaksauce.
0
Reply
Male 1,542
5cats 5cats is NEVER wrong
0
Reply
Male 4,373
Language is a fascinating thing. One wrong letter has made that title a train wreck.
2
Reply
Male 37,042
markust123 Oops, thanks! 
I have to use Chrome to fix it... or maybe Fancy will? 

Edit: I fixed it, then it got kicked back into submissions, and now Fancylad has restored it :-D
-2
Reply
Male 216
She does have a point, abortion should never be treated flippantly, to do so is disrespectful and in very poor taste. However abortion is and should always be a personal choice taken by the woman. By all means explain the available options, in a neutral way, but the final decision should always be respected. In the end the only thing that will reduce abortion numbers is mandatory sex education given throughout a child's school career.
3
Reply
Male 97
mrteatime There are some interesting points that are covered in this video (video is from 2015 and is sadly still accurate) that address horrifying inconsistencies in education.  Sadly, as long as someone believes that the human body and its functions are dirty, there will be no resolution.
0
Reply
Male 216
kuman Yes, I agree, attitudes to sex and the human body need a massive shift in many cases.
1
Reply
Male 256
mrteatime Thanks.  This is clear and concise.  It follows my own opinion exactly.  Our society should provide: 
  1. Factual, early education including discussions of all manners of contraception and lifestyle choices,
  2. A full understanding of all available options regarding pregnancy, and 
  3. Respect and full support given to the woman regardless of her personal decision.

2
Reply
Male 216
punko Yes indeed, spot on.
0
Reply
Male 37,042
mrteatime I mostly agree Mr.teatime, but we've had mandatory sex education in Canada since 1975 (iirc) from Kindergarten on upwards. In the USA not long after that, and similar in the UK (again, iirc). Teen pregnancy rates have skyrocketed since then...

Now some of that is because of dozens of other factors, but easy access to abortion plays a part as well. A good chunk of the women getting abortions are using it as a form of birth control. 

I think she's stuck to the topic quite well, isn't blaming anyone who has an abortion at all (that I heard) and says if a friend gets one? You should comfort and support her as best you can. It's a serious and life-changing procedure.
-2
Reply
Male 19,981
5cats easy access to abortion plays a part as well. A good chunk of the women getting abortions are using it as a form of birth control.

Verrrry vague language there.Define "good chunk." The Guttmacher Institute and their research say "women get abortions as a form of birth control" is a fallacy.

Let's not mix opinion with reality.
0
Reply
Male 37,042
fancylad Since most places keep NO record of why? There's really no way of knowing.

Fancy? Can you fix the title? That should be What eh? My bad. I'll try in Chrome...

And you link shows 40-70% of women aren't getting one for health or rape or that sort of thing, sounds like failed or unused birth control is their reason... :-/

-1
Reply
Male 216
5cats While I agree that women using abortions as a form of birth control can in some cases demonstrate a worryingly flippant attitude, it can be very easy to be caught out accidentally, after all no form of contraception is one hundred percent effective.

But I think there are also other factors at work which run deeper in society and undermine sexual education such as religion, sexual stigma, social background and a lack of education from parents who are inept in discussing such things. There needs to be a shift in sexual attitudes within society and I think the US does fall behind many other countries and to be honest it's a similar story here in the UK too.
1
Reply
Male 1,805
She's right.  Abortion is a big deal, and saying it's not is a big lie, because it robs the choices, and life of the most helpless of people.
-3
Reply
Male 163
monkwarrior prolly true but how is that any different from any other part of our culture,
0
Reply
Male 5,641
While a couple of her points are kind of reasonable, she goes overboard to make those few seem more so. With regard to the rest of what she says here, she's really kind of an asshole. Yes, for some "It's more than a little terrifying" but it's also true that with a properly trained physician and staff in a properly set up operating room "it shouldn't have to be so scary." Certainly, it shouldn't be viewed as a cake walk since it really isn't an appropriate form of birth control, but it's also not heart transplant or brain surgery. We may want teens to be worried enough to avoid repeat procedures but we also don't want them so afraid that teen motherhood numbers surge. Now, why shouldn't you try to cheer up a good friend after something like an abortion with a funny movie? They're likely to be in at least some pain and probably feeling sad about having an abortion procedure, right? What would this asshole do...keep asking how much it hurts and telling her "friend" how unhappy she should be for having gone though with it? And you know who knows that she's had an abortion? All the asshole protesters (like her, probably) standing outside the clinic telling the exiting women that they're horrible sinners and are going to hell for their decision.
No. She's just a smug, self important ass. If a friend of hers ever ends up going through an abortion, she should just stay the hell away from her for a while. 
2
Reply
Male 37,042
broizfam So teenagers should act as 'escorts' like the article promotes?
So teens should advertise that they had an abortion, like the article says?

I think you've missed the point. And she does say (a couple of times iirc) to support, comfort and help your friend in many ways, but NOT by making a joke out of it.
-3
Reply
Male 5,641
5cats There's no reason a responsible, caring teenager shouldn't be able to assist as an escort. Someone who feels they need to abort but are terrified, and some really are terrified, may well see her and think "If she made it through, so can I." Feeling supported can be quite important. Should they advertise it? Depends a bit on how it's done. If it's just shout it to the world as a proud achievement, no. If it's to say "I made a mistake, I made this decision to fix it, I survived, and so can you" then, yes. If it's to say to some disgusting protester (some of them are really awful, some really are not at all) "Fuck you, it's done and now I can get on with my life", then definitely yes.
1
Reply
Male 37,042
Well, she does get into the abortion issue a little bit :-/ But that's to refute garbage peddled in the Teen Vogue article.

It's no secret, Teen Vogue is 100% pro-abortion, pro- Planned Parenthoon and opposed to all pro-life groups. They've printed over 60 articles supporting abortion (in one way or another) THIS YEAR alone...

Further Reading: http://www.teaparty.org/pro-lifer-16-hailed-planned-parenthoods-worst-nightmare-220505/
-4
Reply
Male 19,981
5cats I don't think anyone is "pro-abortion." I think you're thinking "pro-choice" and what's wrong with being pro-planned parenthood? Because abortions make up 3% of their annual services? Jeez.

Again, TeaParty.org? Let's use some less-biased sources.
3
Reply
Male 7,502
fancylad Because abortions make up 3% of their annual services?

The 3% arguement is pure bullshit and has been debunked.  They only reach that by claiming EVERYTHING as a procedure. 

Say a women comes in for an abortion. First she'll have a pregnancy test (just to make sure), an STD test and an exam.  Hey, guess what, between a $10 pregancy stick, a cheap STD test and a 'how you doing today', she's only got an abortion 25% of the time.

Hey, you REALLY want to get the percent of abortions down?  Hand out free contraceptives and count each condom as a 'procedure'.

Major League baseball only has 2,430 games a season..but sells 20 millions hot dogs.  So, by PP 'logic', they play baseball only 0.012% of the time.  I mean, should they call themselves the National Hot Dog League?

BTW...that "3%" accounts for almost half of their non-government revenue. 
1
Reply
Male 620
megrendel " BTW...that "3%" accounts for almost half of their non-government revenue."

Not sure about that but I know it makes of 0% of the governmental revenue because of right wing morals (which don't apply to defense spending). Btw, since it is not governmental spending then you should really just stay out of it since it isn't your business. 
1
Reply
Male 7,502
marsii I know it makes of 0% of the governmental revenue 

What part of the words non-government revenue in my statement did you not understand?

marsii which don't apply to defense spending

Which part of the belief that 'killing babies = bad, self-defence = good' do you not understand?  Even if you don't agree with it, both are logical stances.

marsii since it is not governmental spending then you should really just stay out of it since it isn't your business. 

If it being someone's 'business' was a requirement, the lib brigades would be a lot less annoying. 
-2
Reply
Male 620
megrendel Oh, you mean you support sending our troops to die so that we can kill more brown people so rich people can get richer from oil? That kind of defense spending?

No babies are dying (except in the liberated middle east) buddy! Way to give a shit about children except when they actually exist! That is the republican M.O.: innocent until exists.

Food stamps: fuckem the greedy shits
School: you get what you can pay for
Health Care: Don't insure those poors, let em work it off

Abortion: aww what a cute innocent life we must protect.

Disgusting fucking hypocrite.
2
Reply
Male 7,502
marsii Oh, you mean you support sending our troops to die **yadda yadda bullshit**

Yes, I support a strong military. 

marsii No babies are dying 

Science would disagree with you.  I thought you libs believed in science.

marsii Food stamps: fuckem the greedy shits

The only thing wrong with the Food Stamp program is the abuse of it.

marsii School: you get what you can pay for

That's true in most things.  I'm all for funding public schools. I'm against teaching stupid shit, zero accountability and useless federal oversight that is there only to protect the unions, not the children.

School, public or private, is only as effective as the teachers, students and parents make it.

marsii Health Care: Don't insure those poors, let em work it off

Even when I was poor I could find insurance. It's not the states, nor the taxpayers, responsibility to insure you.  The ACA did nothing to improve insurance or lower its rates (in fact, it increased them.)

marsii Disgusting fucking hypocrite.

Ignorant fucking troll. 
-1
Reply
Male 620
megrendel " Science would disagree with you.  I thought you libs believed in science. "

Science is a foreign language to you right wing nutters. The M.O. is whatever I say is science, everything else is just greedy scientist manipulating data for grants. Zero logic used: you are worth 0 time educating. 
1
Reply
Male 7,502
marsii Science is a foreign language to you right wing nutters

FYI...I'm a research chemist.  'Whatever I say' has no effect on inverse emulsions.  Only science. 
-2
Reply
Male 620
megrendel And I'm a Ph.D. Chemist on the internet ;)

2
Reply
Male 7,502
marsii You can be anything you want on the internet, if you're petty enough to make shit up (as I'm sure you're used to).

I just happened to have spent the last 25 years doing chemistry work in the textile, petroleum and water treatment fields.  This is consistent with discussions I have in the past on the subject.  I also do a little graphic design.
-1
Reply
Male 620
megrendel I bet you also juggle and are great with balloon animals. Point being, science doesn't say anything about when human life begins or even ends and your claim that it does makes you a bad fake chemist instead of just a fake chemist.
1
Reply
Male 7,502
marsii Juggle? No.  Balloon animals? Yes, have done them in the past, along with face painting, but would consider myself only a 'fair' balloon artist. (I make a real good snake)

And yes, science does have something to say when life begins.  Do a little research, and you will find that a freshly fertilized zygote meets the scientific definition of life.

You may have a better shot if you argue when consciousness, as that is harder to measure and more open to debate.  I would argue that some people, such as yourself, still have not attained consciousness.
-2
Reply
Male 620
megrendel The definition of life is controversial. The current definition is that organisms maintain homeostasis, are composed of cells, undergo metabolism, can grow, adapt to their environment, respond to stimuli, and reproduce.

look it up before pretending to be a scientist
0
Reply
Male 7,502
marsii

The conclusion that human life begins at sperm-egg fusion is uncontested, objective, based on the universally accepted scientific method of distinguishing different cell types from each other and on ample scientific evidence (thousands of independent, peer-reviewed publications). Moreover, it is entirely independent of any specific ethical, moral, political, or religious view of human life or of human embryos. - Dr. M.L. Condic. "When does human life begin?  A scientific perspective"
-2
Reply
Male 620
megrendel So the embryos that they freeze for years: alive to you

Fill a cup of sperm and eggs and shake: millions of lives

Woman carries to term an infant without a brain - never developed the brain: alive

Ridiculous. Your source: "When does human life begin?  A scientific perspective" was an article, not peer reviewed, written for the bdfund.org which is an anti-choice site. Not a scientific institution. You have made a complete fool of yourself.

2
Reply
Male 7,502
marsii All of your arguments are based on 'feels', not science.

How about a textbook?Human life begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm unites with a female gamete or oocyte (ovum) to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.” “A zygote is the beginning of a new human being (i.e., an embryo).” - Keith L. Moore, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 7th edition

The Mayo Clinic?  “By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception." - Dr. Hymie Gordon, Chairman of the Department of Genetics

How about Planned Parenthood? '... at least one [sperm] will reach the egg, fertilize it,  and conception will take place. A new life will begin.' - Conception, Birth and Contraception, a book approved by PP and Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States. 



-2
Reply
Male 620
megrendel A woman is currently carrying to term a baby that has no brain developed so she can donate the organs. When did this "life" die? Or is a human without a brain alive to you? Would you vote for it if it promised to make Mexico pay for the wall?

I'm also not going to bother correcting all of your pro life sources and bastardizations of reputable organizations sources. You've already showed yourself to be a liar and dishonest about sources when I don't have to search 3 of them at time. (second one is another pro life hero, surprise).
0
Reply
Male 7,502
marsii Or is a human without a brain alive to you?

In the scenario you put forth, the baby meets all the scientific definitions of life. Is it viable? No. Is it life? Yes.

What you seem to be unable to comprehend is that 'life' is a scientific term, and that term is  what I'm discussing.  And that definition is not dependent on any abortion stance.

I told you early on that you'd have better luck arguing consciousness, or better yet, personhood.  Both are more up for debate than the scientific requirements to define life.

Submission duly noted.
-1
Reply
Male 620
megrendel Right. Maybe you need a reminder of where the convo started:


marsii No babies are dying 

You: Science would disagree with you.  I thought you libs believed in science.

Then proceeds to go on a days long diatribe where you just cite political pro life sources that all say "life" begins at conception in a thread about abortion and now that you've been swatted down you pretend that you aren't stupid, you were just arguing semantics. Well sorry, you are stupid.
0
Reply
Male 7,502
marsii Yes, the argument started about babies dying (abortion).  But the definition of life is separate from abortion.

So, abortion causes a life to end. 
-1
Reply
Male 620
megrendel  So, abortion causes a life to end. 

Then address the point you ignored before: 

There is currently a woman carrying to term and embryo that never developed a brain and never will. At what point would aborting this embryo be "baby murder" in your backwards view of the world? This is why anti choice zealots should be ignored: there was no human at conception. Its a clump of human cells that do not fit the definition of alive much like a corpse that hasn't rotted to dust isn't alive because a few cells haven't stopped dividing yet. 
0
Reply
Male 7,502
marsii There is currently a woman carrying to term and embryo that never developed a brain and never will

Yes, that happens.  The argument isn't life, it's viability and personhood.

marsii This is why anti choice zealots should be ignored

Actually, you don't know my stance.  And anti-lifers tend to ignore anything that's not convenient to their argument. (and no, don't like the term anti-lifer. It's pro-choice, just as the other side is pro-life, but you can't bring yourself to say that.)

marsii there was no human at conception

Science says otherwise. 

marsii Its a clump of human cells 

You're a clump of human cells, can we abort you?

marsii corpse that hasn't rotted to dust isn't alive because a few cells haven't stopped dividing yet.

Cellular division does not define life. Cancer is cellular division, but does not constitute life. ONE of the reasons a zygote is defined as a life is an individual constituted to carry on the activities of life by means of organs separate in function but mutually dependent.  A few dividing cells in a corpse does not constitute an individual.  

You're really not very good at this, or you?
-1
Reply
Male 620
megrendel  Yes, that happens.  The argument isn't life, it's viability and personhood. 
Hiding behind semantics again. You're beat and you won't admit it so you continue to waste time. A clump of cells isn't a human life any more than medical waste such as a placenta. You're wrong and struggling to shut the fuck up, I get it. 

 Actually, you don't know my stance. 

You don't have a stance otherwise you'd have said it by now. You tried to argue and you failed. Your logic leads to a brainless corpse being considered a human life because of an irrelevant definition that you stumbled into an abortion debate with. Again, the only reason you are still "arguing" is that you have a lot of trouble admitting you don't know what the fuck you are talking about and you waste your own time because you don't have a point or a way to prove it. No logic, no argument, no point. 

 You're a clump of human cells, can we abort you? 

Why am I not surprised that I have to explain that you can't abort a human life either by definition or legally? I'm a person so there is no abortion procedure and legally it would be murder (not that the right wing has a problem ending human lives unjustly). Legally and practically you can abort a clump of cells or throw out an amputated limb because those things aren't human lives. Again, you are just wasting time because you don't know what else to do. Abortion isn't murder. The proof is in the embryo example. Life starts well after conception because a life ends in death and if the brainless embryo never had a death point because it never had a life point. A viable infant can die, not an embryo that has not developed. You'll try some half assed deflection in reply but you don't have a point because you don't know when to walk away. You're really bad this, I don't need to ask. Sorry.
0
Reply
Male 7,502
marsii Your logic leads to a brainless corpse being considered a human life because of an irrelevant definition 

No, it does not.

The only way you can infer that is by intentionally misrepresenting the facts and what is being argued. But what am I saying? That's the only way you could ever argue as neither facts nor logic support your rantings. 
-1
Reply
Male 37,042
marsii Christ on a stick, you are a vile troll Mars. I saw a few rational comments from you and thought 'Maybe Mars is ok now?' but nope, you're a disgusting little idiot of a troll yet again.

If you don't think the Mayo Clinic knows a thing or two about medicine? You're both hopeless and worthless. Go ask your mother to abort you retroactively, thanks.
-1
Reply
Male 620
5cats You are a drain on society. Other people have to work harder at their job to support you so you can have more free time to be a piece of shit towards others on the internet.
0
Reply
Male 37,042
marsii So, you just came back to troll some more eh Mars? And for a moment I thought you'd out-grown it. Sad.
-2
Reply
Male 620
5cats Canadian degenerate copies worst U.S. president tweet style. SAD.
1
Reply
Male 37,042
megrendel Yup. Follow the money, and the big bucks come from abortions, and selling baby parts.
-3
Reply
Male 37,042
fancylad I mean the articles are pro-abortion, supporting and promoting abortion, yes? Obviously. The articles they publish support abortion, so they support abortion. Yes, people can be "pro-abortion" they just like to call themselves "pro-choice" eh? You cannot be for "choice" (meaning unrestricted and paid for by the government) and not be for abortion as well.

Teen Vogue doesn't print much of anything supporting adoption or other 'pro-life' ideas. Thus they are pro-abortion. 

And 90% (or more) of pro-lifers agree that sometimes an abortion is justified. Just sayin...
-4
Reply
Male 216
5cats 
"And 90% (or more) of pro-lifers agree that sometimes an abortion is justified. Just sayin..."

Where did that statistic come from?
1
Reply
Male 37,042
mrteatime A Pro-choice pamphlet I read at a pro-abortion rally. I asked the young woman at the booth and she said it proved how hypocritical pro-lifers are.

I disagree. I think it shows how open-minded the pro-life movement is, how willing they are to accept the grim necessity of many abortions. Not many of them will object to when a mother's life is in physical danger, for example. Or if the baby is massively deformed and will almost certainly die anyhow, for another.
-2
Reply
Male 1,364
Yes, people can be "pro-abortion" they just like to call themselves "pro-choice" eh? You cannot be for "choice" (meaning unrestricted and paid for by the government) and not be for abortion as well.

That's like saying that people who are "pro-gun ownership" are "pro-killing." You can't be for "gun ownership" (meaning the ownership of guns for the purpose of self-defense or for rebellion against a tyrannical government) and not be for killing as well.

The words "pro-abortion," like the words "pro-killing," imply a context that isn't quite accurate.
5
Reply
Male 37,042
bliznik Because guns cannot possibly be used for hunting, sport, collecting or self defence. Nope! That's un-possible!!
And abortions have so many other uses! Like selling the body parts of dead babies, which PP did...

If you support abortion? You are pro-abortion. :shrugs: so? Accept the reality of your beliefs, I think.
-5
Reply
Male 1,364
Because guns cannot possibly be used for hunting, sport, collecting or self defence. Nope! That's un-possible!!

Only a small portion of guns are used to kill.

Only a small portion of planned parenthood assists determined women in getting an abortion.

Planned parenthood has many, many, many services other than to assist women in obtaining an abortion. Guns have many, many, many uses other than to kill other people.

If your logic is that planned parenthood is pro-abortion when a very small percentage of its services are allocated towards abortion, then by that same logic all gun owners are pro-killing when a very small percentage of guns are used to kill.
2
Reply
Male 37,042
bliznik No, a massive number (%) of women who go for 'counselling' at PP get abortions. Why else would they go there? 
A survey of their clinics found that 75% of them had NO alternatives offered, no information available other than how to get an abortion, nothing but abortion material provided. The councillors did not even know how to start adoption proceedings, or where to get that information, for example.

It makes them money, it's what they are there to do: abortion factory and selling baby parts.
-2
Reply
Male 1,364
No, a massive number (%) of women who go for 'counselling' at PP get abortions. Why else would they go there?


Why else? There are many, many, many reasons to go to planned parenthood. It sounds like you haven't ever spoken to a women who has gone there. =/ You can get breast examinations, cervical cancer screening, pregnancy testing, STI testing and treatment, sex education, vasectomies, LGBT services, birth control, reversible contraception, emergency contraception, and abortions. The last two are the ones you have an issue with, and every news agency agrees that those only amount to 3% of their services.

That 75% number you quoted refers to the number of planned parenthood customers who fall below 150% of the poverty line.
2
Reply
Male 4,402
5cats 5's I own two 9mm rifles and I am in favor of gun rights But I do not hunt. I am Anti Hunting. But by your reasoning Due to the fact that I own two rifles I am Pro-Hunting. It is possible to be in favor but anti the other
0
Reply
Male 37,042
thezigrat But it's difficult to be pro-hunting and want to confiscate all the guns, correct? Sure there's bows and spears, but I think 99% of hunters use guns... maybe less but the point remains valid.

Just like you can be pro-life but still accept the reality that some abortions are necessary. Correct? See?
-1
Reply
Male 6,187
bliznik We have a winner.
3
Reply
Male 620
bliznik Nailed it. 
2
Reply
Male 4,402
5cats Tell that to the Represinitives who are trying to ban abortion in all instences
1
Reply
Male 37,042
thezigrat A small minority. Deal with reality ok?
-3
Reply
Male 4,402
5cats But they are the ones forcing the passing of Abortion Ban Laws
0
Reply
Male 620
thezigrat And make sure health insurance doesn't provide birth control. Really fucked up reasoning from the right wing. 
1
Reply
Male 37,042
marsii That never happened and you know it. 
The 'morning after pill' is an abortion pill, some people (Nuns specifically) objected to that being covered by insurance they had to pay for (for their employees).
-3
Reply
Male 620
5cats Except doctors say its not and you'll just pretend it is regardless. My employer doesn't get to tell me what I can do with my paycheck and they should stay the fuck out of my healthcare even more. 
1
Reply
Male 37,042
marsii Other doctors say it is. So? They call it an abortifacient for a reason, dude.
I say it is if it kills the embryo (or whatever the proper term is) after the 4th or 5th division? It's an abortion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortifacient
-3
Reply
Male 620
5cats The morning-after pill will not induce an abortion in a woman who is already pregnant, nor will it affect the developing pre-embryo or embryo (Van Look & Stewart, 1998). Emergency contraception prevents pregnancy and helps a woman prevent the need for abortion.

google it
1
Reply
Male 37,042
marsii No need to. It is an abortion pill, I provided the link saying so. Done deal. The term you use is ONE of the definitions of 'abortion' IE: a medical procedure. There are other meanings and they are equally valid.
You want to nit-pick? Over your own ignorance? Go play with yourself.

It "won't affect" the pre-embryo? Except to kill it... lolz! You really ARE that stupid after all Mars! Even stupider than NF2...
-3
Reply