Home - List All Discussions

Celebrity's who have had abortions.

by: LolitaOlivia

Most famous in bold.
1. Simone de Beauvoir
2. Senta Berger (actress)
3. Kay Boyle (writer)
4. Alice May Brock (restauranteur)
5. Hortense Calisher (novelist)
6. Judy Collins
7. Catherine Deneuve
8. Nora Ephron
9. Lee Grant
10. Lillian Hellman
11. Elizabeth Janeway (novelist)
12. Evelyn Keyes (actress)
13. Billie Jean King
14. Ursula Le Guin
15. Viveca Lindfors (actress)
16. Marya Mannes (journalist)
17. Eve Merriam (poet)
18. Jeanne Moreau (actress)
19. Anais Nin
20. Eleanor Perry (dramatist)
21. Francoise Sagan (novelist)
22. Romy Schnieder (actress)
23. Susan Sontag (novelist)
24. Gloria Steinem
25. Barbara Tuchman (historian)
26. Anne Archer
27. Bess Armstrong
28. Judy Belushi
29. Polly Bergen
30. Jill Clayburgh
31. Joan Collins
32. Barbara Corday (television executive)
33. Linda Ellerbee
34. Ava Gardner
35. Whoopi Goldberg
36. Margot Kidder
37. Rita Moreno
38. Kathy Najimy
39. Sinead O'Connor
40. Nora Sayre (film critic/author)
41. Alice Walker
42. Frida Kahlo
43. Margaret Cho
44. Rebecca Walker
45. Maria Hinojosa
46. Lil' Kim
47. Traci Lords
48. Wallis Simpson (Wife of King Edward VIII)
49. Ani DiFranco
And these are the ones we know of, I'm sure there are many more we don't know about(I've heard rumors about Britney Spears).

reply from: yoda

Thanks, I've been looking for a list of "stars" to boycott.

reply from: LolitaOlivia

I'm just saying that if you think abortion is murder you should probably think all these women are murderers.

reply from: joe

All these criminals should be arrested and charged with murder.

reply from: lukesmom

OMG! I am SOOOO impressed! I am just gaga over all these names! OK, seeing all these FAMOUS people just shows how wrong I have been all along!
Geez, get a clue, of course these women are murderers if they had an abortion and killed their own child. Do you actually think because they are so called celebraties their abortions are morally right? Time to grow up and use that head for something useful.

reply from: AshMarie88

So, what's so special about them? Hollywood rots everyone's minds anyway, time to boycott!!

reply from: 4given

http://www.prolife.com/celeb.htm

reply from: 4given

Here is a few of the PP supporters.. I will update, and hopefully w/ a much better list.
http://www.fightpp.org/

reply from: sk1bianca

some celebrities who regret their abortions.
http://www.silentnomoreawareness.org/testimonies/celebrities.html

reply from: AshMarie88

Jennifer O Neill's abortion testimony video: http://www.priestsforlife.org/video/testimony5110/

Heartbreaking

reply from: jujujellybean

I'm just saying that if you think abortion is murder you should probably think all these women are murderers.
Yes, thank you, they are. they have killed innocent children. Glad you realize it!

reply from: LolitaOlivia

Well, I got the list from a pro-choice site, and I'm pretty sure women who regret it were kept off the list. Most of them women on there have actually spoken out for the pro-choice cause. The only one who might have regretted it was Wallis Simpson, but only because it was a back alley abortion and it caused her to be infertile. Though, I don't think she ever wanted children anyway.

reply from: QueenJ

You guys jump to conclusions SO quickly. You need to start asking questions of a poster's intentions first before ASSuming what they mean. But you won't because you are who you are and are so stuck in your ways that it's likely you'll stay that way.

reply from: kayluvzchoice

It isn't really any of your business. And have you seen Britney lately? You'd want her to raise another child?

reply from: 4given

Who are you addressing this comment to Kayla? I don't care a bit about any "celebrity" really. Who is "your"?

reply from: LolitaOlivia

No, Britney shouldn't. But I was pointing this out because many people think only evil crack whores get abortions. And all of these women are either long dead, or 100% open about their abortions.

reply from: 4given

And I am here to thank the drug- addicted women that do not. Did you tell your mother and father that you aborted their grandchild?

reply from: LolitaOlivia

And I am here to thank the drug- addicted women that do not. Did you tell your mother and father that you aborted their grandchild?
Yeah. All my friends know, too. They're all cool with it.

reply from: 4given

Yeah. All my friends know, too. They're all cool with it.
You did tell your parents? Your so-called friends are probably as misguided as you. What makes them "cool with it"? They just ignore it and accept that you have killed your child? How many abortions have you had? I read your post about the morning after abortion. Are you a repeat offender? You will understand the pain of abortion. If not now, in the future.

reply from: LolitaOlivia

Yeah. All my friends know, too. They're all cool with it.
You did tell your parents? Your so-called friends are probably as misguided as you. What makes them "cool with it"? They just ignore it and accept that you have killed your child? How many abortions have you had? I read your post about the morning after abortion. Are you a repeat offender? You will understand the pain of abortion. If not now, in the future.
Only had one, though I'd get another if I ever got pregnant by accident again. They're cool with it, as in that most of them actively supported me. Many of my friends helped me to arrange it and drove me there. My parents came over and made me tea afterwards and my friends pitched in and bought me a deluxe edition of the new Harry Potter book (they waited in line at midnight for me) as a gift to read while I waited. And there's no pain accept some really bad cramps.

reply from: lukesmom

Those that promote the killing of the unborn not only have that to atone for but also the moral and ethical corruption of a generation. Please may the killing end before another generation is corrupted.

reply from: LolitaOlivia

Sorry, I want seven kids (but not 'till I'm good and ready) and I'm raising all of them pro-choice. Some of my friends have kids too. One of my BFF's took her daughter with her when she got her last abortion and explained to her what was going on and how important it is to have the right to choose. Sweetest little thing. We got her a little shirt that says "My Mommy is Pro-Choice and So Am I!".

reply from: lukesmom

Sorry, I want seven kids (but not 'till I'm good and ready) and I'm raising all of them pro-choice. Some of my friends have kids too. One of my BFF's took her daughter with her when she got her last abortion and explained to her what was going on and how important it is to have the right to choose. Sweetest little thing. We got her a little shirt that says "My Mommy is Pro-Choice and So Am I!".
Talk about child abuse! I am shocked and it takes alot to shock me. You are lower than scum and the names I would like to call you right now cannot be written here. You want 7 kids? You have already murdered your first and oldest, may God have mercy on your soul, which I doubt you have anymore.

reply from: LolitaOlivia

Sorry, I want seven kids (but not 'till I'm good and ready) and I'm raising all of them pro-choice. Some of my friends have kids too. One of my BFF's took her daughter with her when she got her last abortion and explained to her what was going on and how important it is to have the right to choose. Sweetest little thing. We got her a little shirt that says "My Mommy is Pro-Choice and So Am I!".
Talk about child abuse! I am shocked and it takes alot to shock me. You are lower than scum and the names I would like to call you right now cannot be written here. You want 7 kids? You have already murdered your first and oldest, may God have mercy on your soul, which I doubt you have anymore.
They sell those t-shirts online. A lot of people buy them. I've seen lots of little kids wearing them. And God is dead. For realz.

reply from: 4given

Foolish one, your day will come. You will realize the atrocity of your heinousness. You really need to research abortion for one, and realize whom you have become because of it. Search yourself. Don't be reckless. You are in need of a lot. I don't have the desire to pray for you, but maybe God will lead me to.

reply from: LolitaOlivia

I've done research on abortion. Tons of it. On my own, and in my Feminist Studies class. I know what it is, how it's done, and what it does. Why would I do it if I didn't know what it was?

reply from: faithman

I've done research on abortion. Tons of it. On my own, and in my Feminist Studies class. I know what it is, how it's done, and what it does. Why would I do it if I didn't know what it was?
So you are an enformed cold blooded killer of your own flesh and blood. How endearing.

reply from: LolitaOlivia

I've done research on abortion. Tons of it. On my own, and in my Feminist Studies class. I know what it is, how it's done, and what it does. Why would I do it if I didn't know what it was?
So you are an enformed cold blooded killer of your own flesh and blood. How endearing.
By your standards I'm a murderer for the abortion. By PETA's standards I'm a murderer for the fur. By my standards I'm not a murderer at all.

reply from: faithman

Just like a car jacker may not see themselves as a thief, but it ain't any less true. If I killed my own child, I guess I would play the same word games to make it seem not as bad as it is.

reply from: LolitaOlivia

It's not a word game. You guys are just like PETA, but you don't want to admit it.

reply from: SodaBoy

It's not a word game. You guys are just like PETA, but you don't want to admit it.
i see you are in a Feminist studies class, i knew you were getting your ignorance from somewhere.
does your professor throw out completely unsupported comments and statements in class as if they were fact too? im sure she does, but who would believe her...?
forget it i just answered my own question

reply from: LolitaOlivia

It's not a word game. You guys are just like PETA, but you don't want to admit it.
i see you are in a Feminist studies class, i knew you were getting your ignorance from somewhere.
does your professor throw out completely unsupported comments and statements in class as if they were fact too? im sure she does, but who would believe her...?
forget it i just answered my own question
No she doesn't. She's very bright, and an expert on feminism.

reply from: SodaBoy

You mean like if you slipped and fell onto an ejaculating penis while stepping out of the tub?
now that is funny

reply from: SodaBoy

the two qualities are mutually exclusive

reply from: LolitaOlivia

It's not a word game. You guys are just like PETA, but you don't want to admit it.
i see you are in a Feminist studies class, i knew you were getting your ignorance from somewhere.
does your professor throw out completely unsupported comments and statements in class as if they were fact too? im sure she does, but who would believe her...?
forget it i just answered my own question
No she doesn't. She's very bright, and an expert on feminism.
the two qualities are mutually exclusive
What, are you anti-feminist or something?

reply from: SodaBoy

does thinking that they are misinformed, usually ugly and well endowed with arm pit hair make me anti-feminist?

reply from: LolitaOlivia

Ugly? Most feminists I know are very attractive. That's a tired stereotype.

reply from: LolitaOlivia

I'm sorry, I'll edit. I've never been on a board that does that before.

reply from: SodaBoy

no it really isn't - but ill concede it is not an absolute - being misinformed is.

reply from: 4given

AGREED! Edit, you beast! You are just being lazy and rude.

reply from: SodaBoy

in her defense (and in mine) it is actually a courtesy on most boards to keep the quotes intact

reply from: faithman

Ugly? Most feminists I know are very attractive. That's a tired stereotype.
Attractive to wart hogs maybe? Bull dykes are usually quite ugly. Other wise they could get a man.

reply from: LolitaOlivia

Ugly? Most feminists I know are very attractive. That's a tired stereotype.
Attractive to wart hogs maybe? Bull dykes are usually quite ugly. Other wise they could get a man.
I'm a feminist and I have a boyfriend. All my feminist friends also have boyfriends(or girlfriends). Some are married. And the ones who are single like it that way. Not everyone has to be in a relationship to be happy.

reply from: SodaBoy

do you have to confess this at your rallies?

reply from: LolitaOlivia

do you have to confess this at your rallies?
No, I bring him with me. Plenty of women bring boyfriends or husbands. And there are men there on their own as well.

reply from: SodaBoy

hmm...a bunch of guys hanging out at a feminist rally AND men who choose to go there simply because they want to.....
interesting...
now when you say "men", these were men who were born men correct? they did not have some sort of surgery to make them men because if they did, then I would understand.

reply from: SodaBoy

what feminism has come to mean is very different than the idea that women have the same inherent human rights as men. i know many say that is one division or take on feminism but unfortunately it is the one i think is most widespread among those who use the label.
in any event i was adding levity as i was dealing with someone who really does not have much to offer with regard to serious discussion other than comparisons to PETA

reply from: yoda

Especially if you have no conscience to annoy you.

reply from: jujujellybean

Ugly? Most feminists I know are very attractive. That's a tired stereotype.
Yah, several of my close friends are about the staunchest liberals you could get. They are also very pretty. Their minds, however, in terms of politics and the whole feminists side, I wouldn't bet on being very attractive.

reply from: LolitaOlivia

hmm...a bunch of guys hanging out at a feminist rally AND men who choose to go there simply because they want to.....
interesting...
now when you say "men", these were men who were born men correct? they did not have some sort of surgery to make them men because if they did, then I would understand.
Yes, they were all born men, and are men now. Most of them aren't even gay!

reply from: LolitaOlivia

Especially if you have no conscience to annoy you.
I have a conscience, but I just don't consider abortion immoral. I have a friend who considers killing bugs immoral, so she feels guilty for days on end everytime she swats a fly. I don't have a problem with it, so I'm fine.

reply from: AshMarie88

Maybe I'm the only one on here who hates feminism and the whole "women's rights" thing... I have my reasoning for all of it however.

reply from: yoda

Of course not. You follow the law of the jungle.

reply from: yoda

I think there were some very good reasons for reforming our political and legal system during the last century, like getting the right to vote, and eliminating job discrimination, etc. But nowadays it seems like it's more of a "battle between the sexes" than a cure for discrimination.
And like someone said, "Women will never reach equality with men by stepping on the dead bodies of their children".

reply from: AshMarie88

I think there were some very good reasons for reforming our political and legal system during the last century, like getting the right to vote, and eliminating job discrimination, etc. But nowadays it seems like it's more of a "battle between the sexes" than a cure for discrimination.
And like someone said, "Women will never reach equality with men by stepping on the dead bodies of their children".
Yep. And like my friend and I discuss all the time, women can vote, they can play "men's sports", they can go to jobs and get equal or more pay than men sometimes, they don't have to "slave away" anymore, they can abort their children freely (Obviously I disagree but they still have the "right to abort"...)... So why do they continue fighting for "women's rights"? What other "rights" are they fighting for? Women are equal, I think the thing is they want MORE rights, more rights than men, in my opinion. As I told my friend, they have their pay, they have their sports, they have their jobs, they have their votes, they have their abortions... What more do they want?

reply from: SodaBoy

feminism denies inherent differences between men and women. the facade has tamed a bit over its' history for example, as our friend points out, it is now acceptable to appear as if you like men or care about how you look.
the name itself implies a bias. given your leanings you may interested be in Phyllis Schlafly who is a hero and saved this country from a ridiculous unnecessary amendment.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phyllis_Schlafly

you are not unique or off, those who take garbage classes like "feminist studies" typically don't actually research the tripe their professor is spouting and when they confront real world discussions they are lost when someone actually challenges them on the ridiculous notions they regurgitate.

reply from: prolifejedi

LolitaOlivia, Abortions can damage your ability to carry fully to term.
How sad that little children aren't being fully told what abortion IS. Many children when they see the TRUTH TRUCKS know its a baby, but their parents want to shield them from the hard truth. Show a 4th gradwr an ultrasound of a baby before birth and most would tell you that's a baby, not a blob, not a blood clot, not a "piece of tissue".
And I could really care less about Whoopi Goldberg. I've never liked her, she's not a good comedian.

reply from: LolitaOlivia

Not the kind I had. Only surgical abortions can, and it's still quite rare.
Link: http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_misc.htm

Actually, when I was eleven my mom showed me my ultrasound. It took me nearly an hour to even pick out where I was.

reply from: kayluvzchoice

4given
It was to the OP.

reply from: Banned Member

Sorry, I want seven kids (but not 'till I'm good and ready) and I'm raising all of them pro-choice. Some of my friends have kids too. One of my BFF's took her daughter with her when she got her last abortion and explained to her what was going on and how important it is to have the right to choose. Sweetest little thing. We got her a little shirt that says "My Mommy is Pro-Choice and So Am I!".
I've been a lurker on this site for a couple months, as I swore I wouldn't post anymore, but I have to break that promise now to ask...wear did she get that shirt. I'm going to have a baby about 6 months & I would love to get that shirt for my baby! It would be awesome of you could give me the website she got it from, thanks!

reply from: coco

hmm...a bunch of guys hanging out at a feminist rally AND men who choose to go there simply because they want to.....
interesting...
now when you say "men", these were men who were born men correct? they did not have some sort of surgery to make them men because if they did, then I would understand.
Why is it so hard for you to believe that men go to these types of ralies??? Do you not support the women in your life??? If you dont then that is very sad!! Women should be celebrated and loved, just as men should be!!!

reply from: AshMarie88

Sorry, I want seven kids (but not 'till I'm good and ready) and I'm raising all of them pro-choice. Some of my friends have kids too. One of my BFF's took her daughter with her when she got her last abortion and explained to her what was going on and how important it is to have the right to choose. Sweetest little thing. We got her a little shirt that says "My Mommy is Pro-Choice and So Am I!".
Talk about child abuse! I am shocked and it takes alot to shock me. You are lower than scum and the names I would like to call you right now cannot be written here. You want 7 kids? You have already murdered your first and oldest, may God have mercy on your soul, which I doubt you have anymore.
Lower than scum is right, I can't believe this new pro-abort. Worse than a lot of pro-aborts I've talked to. I'm pretty disgusted now, but am praying for her, her future children (whom I hope she will not be able to conceive, EVER), and her friend. Some people just deserve all the hell that comes to them...

reply from: AshMarie88

However many children I have in the future, I'm raising them pro-life and will put pro-life outfits on them. They'll grow up smart and with hearts.

reply from: faithman

Your post is the reason pro-life will eventually win out. Pro-aborts kill off their future at Planned Parenthood. The one thing that even over comes the stupidity of the farce pro-life movement, is the fact that we are out begatting The pro-death enemy.

reply from: Hereforareason

"Sorry, I want seven kids (but not 'till I'm good and ready) and I'm raising all of them pro-choice. Some of my friends have kids too. One of my BFF's took her daughter with her when she got her last abortion and explained to her what was going on and how important it is to have the right to choose. Sweetest little thing. We got her a little shirt that says "My Mommy is Pro-Choice and So Am I!"."
"My Mommy killed all of my siblings, but for some strange reason didn't kill me. I'm glad she had the option to!"
"Well kids, I am so glad to have all of you! It was very important to be able to kill your earlier siblings though, I didn't want them. We must continue to fight to be sure that you can kill your children too."
"Mommy, did you ever want to kill me?"
How sick is that? Will you even be able to carry 7 babies to term now? Physically? If you can't, will you grieve for the children you wanted, while you fight for the right to kill the ones you don't?
Amber

reply from: LolitaOlivia

Yes I will. That abortion causes miscarriage is overblown. That's only in the riskiest types and still a very rare side effect.
Besides, I want to adopt some unwanted children from foreign countries, too.
And the difference between a wanted and unwanted pregnancy can be as harsh as the difference between sex and rape.
Plenty of kids can appreciate the right to choose. I've been pro-choice since I could walk. They realize that not every woman may want a baby at this moment.

reply from: LolitaOlivia

See, there's your problem. You haven't learned a damned thing since you were two years old.
No, since then I have researched it and learned more and confirmed my beliefs many times over. By your logic, people who were brought up Christian and still are haven't learned a thing since they were two years old.

reply from: AshMarie88

I've been pro-life since I knew what abortion was and I learned what that was when I was 10 or 11 years old. I knew where I stood, I knew what grew inside a woman, I knew what happened to that child, how abortions were performed, etc. I'm 19 now, STILL pro-life.
I'm sure you'll call me biased and uninformed for reading and looking at child/fetal development books and photos when I was a small child, too. Because children are so brainwashed?
It's SCIENCE and FETAL DEVELOPMENT that made me and KEEP ME pro-life. It's the facts that make me stay this way.

reply from: AshMarie88

Science, child development, are all factual. Klanned Parenthood and NOW are not.

reply from: AshMarie88

I sure hope that when you WANT your children, you'll be unable to conceive.
And it's not "rare" that women have trouble having kids after abortions. It happens ALL THE TIME! To MANY women!

reply from: LolitaOlivia

I sure hope that when you WANT your children, you'll be unable to conceive.
And it's not "rare" that women have trouble having kids after abortions. It happens ALL THE TIME! To MANY women!
Proof? I linked in an earlier post to a site with evidence that it's a rare side effect. I've known dozens of women who had plenty of kids after having had an abortion. Maybe back alley abortions in the fifties caused miscarriages, but it's rare today.
The risk for miscarriage after an abortion is the same as the risk after childbirth, possibly less.

reply from: yoda

Induced Abortion and
Risk of Later Premature Births
Brent Rooney
Byron C. Calhoun, M.D.
ABSTRACT
At least 49 studies have demonstrated a statistically significant
increase in premature births (PB) or low birth weight (LBW) risk in
women with prior induced abortions (IAs). This paper will focus on
the risk of early premature births (EPBs) (< 32 weeks gestation)
and extremely early premature births (XPBs) (< 28 weeks gestation).
Large studies have reported a doubling of EPB risk from two
prior IAs. Women who had four or more IAs experienced, on average,
nine times the risk of XPB, an increase of 800 percent.
These results suggest that women contemplating IA should be
informed of this potential risk to subsequent pregnancies, and that
physicians should be aware of thepotential liability and possible
need for intensified prenatal care.
Informed consent for an elective surgical procedure must generally
cover long-term consequences and not just immediate risk.A
woman considering an induced abortion (IA) should thus expect to
be informed of potential effects on her fertility and the health of future
infants, as well as her own future health. An elevated risk of
bearing a child afflicted with a serious disability such as cerebral
palsy might influence her decision, as well as future liability determinations
by courts.
full article in pdf: http://www.jpands.org/vol8no2/rooney.pdf

reply from: LolitaOlivia

Induced Abortion and
Risk of Later Premature Births
Brent Rooney
Byron C. Calhoun, M.D.
ABSTRACT
At least 49 studies have demonstrated a statistically significant
increase in premature births (PB) or low birth weight (LBW) risk in
women with prior induced abortions (IAs). This paper will focus on
the risk of early premature births (EPBs) (< 32 weeks gestation)
and extremely early premature births (XPBs) (< 28 weeks gestation).
Large studies have reported a doubling of EPB risk from two
prior IAs. Women who had four or more IAs experienced, on average,
nine times the risk of XPB, an increase of 800 percent.
These results suggest that women contemplating IA should be
informed of this potential risk to subsequent pregnancies, and that
physicians should be aware of thepotential liability and possible
need for intensified prenatal care.
Informed consent for an elective surgical procedure must generally
cover long-term consequences and not just immediate risk.A
woman considering an induced abortion (IA) should thus expect to
be informed of potential effects on her fertility and the health of future
infants, as well as her own future health. An elevated risk of
bearing a child afflicted with a serious disability such as cerebral
palsy might influence her decision, as well as future liability determinations
by courts.
full article in pdf: http://www.jpands.org/vol8no2/rooney.pdf
It says right there that that's only in surgical abortions. Most early abortions aren't surgical. And it's talking about premature delivery, not miscarriage. There is a difference.

reply from: SodaBoy

typical liberal response - if you are against feminism, you are against women and get asked a ridiculous question like:
Do you not support the women in your life?
Easier than being intellectually honest, I guess.

reply from: 4given

Your post is the reason pro-life will eventually win out. Pro-aborts kill off their future at Planned Parenthood. The one thing that even over comes the stupidity of the farce pro-life movement, is the fact that we are out begatting The pro-death enemy.
My eldest has reported to me the numerous classmates, friends and members of his peer group that he has educated. I love election season, as it gives them the confidence and ability to discuss the issues. Sadly, we are a nation that tolerates the slaughter of the most pure. (why my eldest child knows what a dilation and curretage procedure is.. and he is 10.) The I am a person cards help w/ that. All 3 use them. As timid as he is naturally, he has a strong voice for the innocent. I agree. Ashley, children are naturally pro-life. Ask any child if it is okay to kill a baby, even if the mom doesn't want it. It is the corruption of others that try to justify such heinous acts. But you already know that! We will be the majority! My children are evidence of that!

reply from: yoda

Quibble, quibble, quibble.........

reply from: LolitaOlivia

Quibble, quibble, quibble.........
It's a legit quibble. I've known dozens of people to get abortions, none of them went with the surgical ones. They're more complicated, and a lot rarer these days.

reply from: yoda

Suction Aspiration
This is the most common method of abortion during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. General or local anaesthesia is given to the mother and her cervix is quickly dilated. A suction curette (hollow tube with a knife-edged tip) is inserted into the womb. This instrument is then connected to a vacuum machine by a transparent tube. The vacuum suction, 29 times more powerful than a household vacuum cleaner, tears the fetus and placenta into small pieces which are sucked through the tube into a bottle and discarded.
http://www.angelfire.com/folk/marital/abortions.htm

reply from: LolitaOlivia

Suction Aspiration
This is the most common method of abortion during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. General or local anaesthesia is given to the mother and her cervix is quickly dilated. A suction curette (hollow tube with a knife-edged tip) is inserted into the womb. This instrument is then connected to a vacuum machine by a transparent tube. The vacuum suction, 29 times more powerful than a household vacuum cleaner, tears the fetus and placenta into small pieces which are sucked through the tube into a bottle and discarded.
http://www.angelfire.com/folk/marital/abortions.htm
According to my link (that no one looked at), vacuum abortions don't have that risk:
Again:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_misc.htm

reply from: sunnyday

Why does this 'conversation' still exist?
It's quite apparent Lolita is f***ing with the people on this site. She joined to get a rise out of people. Thankfully most responses have been reasonable.
But really Lolita, you have nothing better to do than try to justify your behavior by attempting to rub other people's nose in it?
We get it. You got an abortion. You think it's ok. Your mom and dad brought you tea. Whoop dee doo for you. Unfortunately your murdered off-spring doesn't have it as good, but that seems to be of no concern to you.
Move on. Find another toy now...

reply from: LolitaOlivia

I only said I'd had an abortion when someone directly asked me.
You're just trying to get rid of me because you know I'm right. It's like that time I went to church with my boyfriend's parents and they kicked me out for saying that King James (who commissioned every fundie's favorite Bible) was a gay, witch-burning, sexist. From the way they reacted, you'd think I'd called Jesus gay. http://skeptically.org/newtestament/id5.html

reply from: lukesmom

You sure do know how to make people like you. You bf's parents must really "love" you when you embarress them in front of their friends. Who cares if someone "asked" if you killed your daughter or son. What matters is that you did. That is what this board is about and you are here for our entertainment but now you are getting boring and it is time for another diversion. Although you baby killers all say the same thing. You have served your time and unless you have something else to offer...yawn...go away

reply from: LolitaOlivia

Lots of people like me. Just not pro-lifers. You guys just want to get rid of me because, like I said, you know I'm right. And my bf's parents aren't crazy about me, but his last girlfriend was a Wiccan Priestess, so they can't complain too much.

reply from: yoda

AshMarie said "And it's not "rare" that women have trouble having kids after abortions. It happens ALL THE TIME! To MANY women!"
Premature delivery IS "trouble".

reply from: yoda

That's because we know that "religioustolerance.org" is notoriously and rabidly proabort, just like you.

reply from: yoda

Hey, I don't want to get rid of you. You're the best thing that's happened to our cause on this forum in quite a while. As long as you keep talking about abortion, and don't throw a whole boatload of distractions at us, I hope you stay around for quite a while. I'm enjoying your posts.

reply from: LolitaOlivia

That's because we know that "religioustolerance.org" is notoriously and rabidly proabort, just like you.
And all your links weren't pro-life? Right...

reply from: sunnyday

Actually, I think you should stay. I have suspicions, sincerely, that you are exorcising your demons. Hopefully in that regard, even if none of us ever agrees, you'll be able to do that.
Regarding King James, I'm Catholic.
Regarding someone being gay, there are fewer things I could care less about (those few being computers, rocks, and outer space).
Regarding Jesus being gay, well now, you're just up to your old tricks again.
God Bless You, and I do mean that sincerely-
Tracy

reply from: yoda

I respect prolife sources........ I do not respect proabort sources.

reply from: LolitaOlivia

I respect prolife sources........ I do not respect proabort sources.
Because you're pro-life. The fact of the matter is that pro-life sites only tell half the story. Pro-choice sites can be just as bad, I'll admit.

reply from: sunnyday

Unrelated question-
How do I change my picture/avatar?
I'm a woman, and my picture is of a man.
Thank you-
:-)

reply from: LolitaOlivia

Click on profile at the top of the page (next to New Topic), scroll down to miscellaneous options.

reply from: yoda

Yes, they mostly tell the "story" from the vantage point of the baby that is killed by elective abortion, that's true. The other "half" of the story is from the vantage point of the pregnant woman who hires someone to kill her baby.
Which vantage point do you think is more relevant to the moral question, that of the victim or the perpetrator of the violence?

reply from: LolitaOlivia

Ummmm, no, we know you think you're right. It's not the same thing, dear. The only reason I, personally, have for wanting you to leave is concern for you. I fear you will suffer an emotional crisis if you ever accept the truth. I think you are deluding yourself at present as a result of a natural defense mechanism. This is why I am in favor of mandatory counseling before and after abortion, as long as we can't get it abolished...I really do care about both mother and child.
I've always been pro-choice. I've seen people like you telling me otherwise before. Now is no different.

reply from: mom5

And I am here to thank the drug- addicted women that do not. Did you tell your mother and father that you aborted their grandchild?
Yeah. All my friends know, too. They're all cool with it.
Your friends are *cool* with it. So sad. I had a friend who I was with after her abortion, I NEVER, EVER used the word *cool* in relation to her abortion. You may not like this, but I am going to pray for you.

reply from: faithman

Yes, they mostly tell the "story" from the vantage point of the baby that is killed by elective abortion, that's true. The other "half" of the story is from the vantage point of the pregnant woman who hires someone to kill her baby.
Which vantage point do you think is more relevant to the moral question, that of the victim or the perpetrator of the violence?
Just what half are we missing? Abortionist cuts baby to death, grinds body in desposal, and flushes down the sewer just because mommy dearest says so.

reply from: LolitaOlivia

Yes, they mostly tell the "story" from the vantage point of the baby that is killed by elective abortion, that's true. The other "half" of the story is from the vantage point of the pregnant woman who hires someone to kill her baby.
Which vantage point do you think is more relevant to the moral question, that of the victim or the perpetrator of the violence?
Just what half are we missing? Abortionist cuts baby to death, grinds body in desposal, and flushes down the sewer just because mommy dearest says so.
What about the woman who is pregnant accidentally, and is desperate not to be? Who's terrified what will happen if she goes through with it? Who had to make a decision no one wants to make?

reply from: lukesmom

Why would YOU imply this is a hard decision? I mean you keep saying that this is not a child and so therefore killing and nonperson is no big deal. In fact you rather had a comfortable time having a tea party with your killing experience.

reply from: LolitaOlivia

Why would YOU imply this is a hard decision? I mean you keep saying that this is not a child and so therefore killing and nonperson is no big deal. In fact you rather had a comfortable time having a tea party with your killing experience.
No one likes getting an unwanted pregnancy, and no one wants to have to choose what to do about it. Sometimes the choice is easier than other times, but most people would rather not get pregnant in the first place.

reply from: LolitaOlivia

Sex is a natural part of human life. The human body wants sex, and will openly crave it. Only asexuals get on fine without it.
People willingly do things they'd rather not do. Like, I'd rather not kill a fly with my flyswatter, but when it comes into my house, killing it is better than letting it die on it's own and end up getting eaten by my cat and making her sick.

reply from: LolitaOlivia

There are acts other than intercourse, but they aren't always as fun or easy. Unless you're Bill Clinton, of course.
Many species other than humans have sex for non-reproductive purposes.
Depends on what dies. Early in pregnancy, it's around the same size and intellect capacity of the fly I mentioned.
Yes.

reply from: LolitaOlivia

Not all, but most.
Yeah, but the first set is usually a lot bigger.
If you abort for health reasons, yes there is. And if you know you'll have to drop out of school/breakup with your boyfriend/get in trouble with your parents/loose your house/have to quit your job/miss out on a lot of things if you carry to term, there also is.
Not always. What if after it's born it's raped, tortured, and skinned alive? Either way it's dead, but one way is a lot more traumatic (especially since it's then capable of thinking and feeling) than the other.

reply from: LolitaOlivia

But it's always possible. Especially in families with a history of violence.

reply from: yoda

And that justifies killing a baby...... exactly how?
Honest people do not solve their problems by killing other innocent people.

reply from: yoda

Amazing...... now unborn babies are like houseflies to you.... amazing.

reply from: yoda

But it's always possible. Especially in families with a history of violence.
So you justify killing babies on the "possibility" that they may have a bad life if allowed to live? How very condescending of you.......
Your life may get a lot worse too, you know.... why are you still alive?

reply from: LolitaOlivia

But it's always possible. Especially in families with a history of violence.
So you justify killing babies on the "possibility" that they may have a bad life if allowed to live? How very condescending of you.......
No, I was just answering his arguement that "There is no question that abortion represents the greater harm to the child..."
It justifies getting rid of the pregnancy.
Pretty much. They have the same intellectual capacity and are about the same size as early on in pregnancy.

reply from: yoda

Pretty much. They have the same intellectual capacity and are about the same size as early on in pregnancy.
Oh my, you're really amazing..... and I suppose by extension, and newborn baby is just like a fly with functioning lungs?
Did your parents consider you no more valuable than a fly, by any chance?

reply from: LolitaOlivia

Newborns are more developed than flies. More like cats or dogs.
When I was born, certainly. Before birth, probably. I was a wanted pregnancy, though my parents are pro-choice.

reply from: yoda

Newborns are more developed than flies. More like cats or dogs. .
I can't top that....... you've reached the ultimate level of an uncompassionate, unloving, unfeeling, uncaring, totally selfish expression.
I rest my case. Post all you like, I'm done here.

reply from: jujujellybean

Newborns are more developed than flies. More like cats or dogs.
When I was born, certainly. Before birth, probably. I was a wanted pregnancy, though my parents are pro-choice.
So you consider them to be equal to cats and dogs at that point?

reply from: yoda

That's what she said..... and she didn't stutter, either.

reply from: LolitaOlivia

What? I like cats and dogs. I think their lives should be protected before a fetus'. Especially since they don't need to use someone's body to live.
No, though it's a complex issue. Developmentally, they're comparable to grown cats and dogs. But since they're human, and they come from human DNA, their lives are still worth more, though I'm not sure I would consider them equal to an adult or an older child.

reply from: LolitaOlivia

For that last *****ing time, the abuse later on argument is not one of my arguments! I already said I was simply answering "There is no question that abortion represents the greater harm to the child..."! I was simply pointing out that what you said was untrue! How thick are you?

reply from: LolitaOlivia

And I just questioned the reasoning behind your assumption that potential suffering later in life might represent greater harm than immediate death. Don't shoot the messenger, sweetheart. It's not my fault if you can't logically defend your own assertions...Your denying something doesn't make it "untrue."
But you said "there is no question" meaning that you believe it's impossible that anything that could happen after birth would be a "greater harm to the child". I was just pointing out that abortion might not, in some cases, represent the greater harm.

reply from: LolitaOlivia

I said that there is no question that abortion represents the greater harm, not that there is not a possibility that the child might later suffer injury. The latter does not logically follow from the former, dear. Clearly either your comprehension is sub par, or you are being deliberately dishonest.
But you said that "There is no question that abortion represents the greater harm to the child..."! But getting born, and then being raped, tortured, and skinned alive would represent a greater harm than having been aborted! I think your comprehension is sub-par. I never said you said that there was no chance of later injury, just that what you said, that "There is no question that abortion represents the greater harm to the child..."! is wrong simply because there could be greater harm to the child down the line.

reply from: LolitaOlivia

You said, "But you said "there is no question" meaning that you believe it's impossible that anything that could happen after birth would be a greater harm to the child," then implied that the fact that later injury might later occur disproved this. Clearly your comprehension is lacking. I do not dispute that later injury might conceivably occur, only that immediate death is unquestionably "greater harm," than allowing a human to live who might suffer later injury. D
o you dispute this, or are you being deliberately obtuse?
I never did dispute that, only the truth of what you had said earlier!

reply from: faithman

And that justifies killing a baby...... exactly how?
Honest people do not solve their problems by killing other innocent people.
Terrified little girls should not be made to make that dicision by worthless men who hate children. They end up posting stupid drivel on forums, trying to justify the horrible thing they did to one of the few persons who would ever truely love her, her preborn child. Abortion is an act of hate that destroys the womb child, and the soul of the mother who submits to it. Then the souless ghouls come to this forum to post their hate speach against the womb child. The coversation here has become very sad indeed.

reply from: LolitaOlivia

I wasn't terrified. He didn't make me do anything. He's not worthless. He's going to be a lawyer one day and richer than you'll ever be.
Plenty of people love me. And for all I know, I could've been pregnant with Stewie Griffin or something equally unloving.
I have a soul. It's really quite pretty.
Hate speech? I don't hate anything except lowlife 'lifers.

reply from: faithman

AAAHHH the self deluded voice of the little death scanc in the morning. Why don't you get your baby hating cowardly punk boy friend to sing a duett with you? Oh thats right, he would rather hide behind your skirt, and laugh at making you the killer of your womb child. Only a heartless monster would kill their own child, and only a gutless coward would make them do it.

reply from: LolitaOlivia

He's here right now. Now he's pissed you called him a punk. Lucky it's a snow day or else he'd be at school right now. He's getting on.
lol why am i a punk? you mean like avril lavigne glitter skulls or jubilee or sex pistols? what kind of punk am i lol?

reply from: LolitaOlivia

and you misspelled *****.

reply from: galen

he he he no i'm the sex pistols punk!......
I also like long walks on the beach and poking dead things with a stik.
LOL!!!!!!
Snow day huh? what part of Virginia did you say you were from?
Answer the question little girl. what did you say your abortion experience was like?
Mary

reply from: LolitaOlivia

South central area. We got snow this weekend. The public schools are still in session (they never cancel them around here), but some of the businesses and colleges are off. There's only about an inch in our yard, but I've heard there's some ice on some of the roads nearby.

reply from: lukesmom

geez, 1 inch! You people in Virginia are weenies! We're getting 6-7 inches just today and it's been snowing about every 3rd day here, except for when it rained a couple of weeks ago. Ice on the roads, pansies!

reply from: galen

LOL i was just thinking the same thing.
Mary

reply from: sunnyday

Cool, thanks!
I think this one is older than me, but it'll do-
:-)

reply from: ProInformed

Um... Hitler was famous too, and very popular (especially with Planned Parenthood's founder who was envious that what he was doing was legal in Germany but not here in the U.S.) I think Hitler was even Time Magazine's man of the year once...
And if Brittney Spears has had an abortion that would certainly explain a LOT.
BTW, there are also many pro-life celebrities and some who later admitted they regretted killing their babies.
Jack Nicholson was concieved by rape and says he is thankful he was allowed to live.
But I'm not much for celebrity worship anyway and am not the least bit surprised that so many from Hollywood have had abortions. A lot of them have fake boobs too. Actresses and/or pro-'choicers' acting like bimbos instead of real feminists... not exactly breaking news LOL!

reply from: GodsLaw4Us2Live

A lot of celebrities seem to have a hard time dealing with reality. Drug and alcohol abuse seems to be common among them. Many celebrities, besides exhibiting weird behavior, have died from overdoses. Celebrities are no one to imitate.

reply from: ProInformed

I read this saying that prosperity is more of a test of character than poverty...
Apparently some folks only refrain from messing up their lives because they lack the funds to do so until they become rich and famous?
And about Brittney: Rather than implying that it's a good thing she can go have any future babies killed before birth because she is failing at being a good mother to her children after birth, it would be much better for her to get some PAS counseling (if an abortion from her past is causing her parenting problems).
The problem with poor parenting, child neglect, or even child abuse is not that the victims exist but that those who fail to protect, provide for, and nurture them are lacking one or more of the following: Support, skills, compassion, responsibility, maturity. Killing the innocent victims doesn't solve any of those problems, the person with the problem still has the problem and is still likely to victimize other children.

reply from: ProInformed

Originally posted by: LolitaOlivia
I wasn't terrified. He didn't make me do anything. He's not worthless. He's going to be a lawyer one day and richer than you'll ever be.
Why would you have sex with a male who doesn't even love you enough to also love your baby too (and want to protect you both)?
How incredibly sad.
And what will it matter if he does someday become a lawyer and rich? He'll still always be a male who didn't love you enough to accept and protect both you and your baby.
I know all about justifying killing your own baby by pointing to things that supposedly could not have happened without such a sacrifice... been there done that myself when I was young. What you do not yet know is that most likely you will someday grow to detest all those things you credit the abortion for.
I also know all about pretending it was your choice and that you weren't afraid he was going to dump you if you didn't abort...
and then pretending that is somehow 'feminist'...
It will become increasingly difficult for you over the years as you learn more about how developed your baby was and what was actually done to your baby.
And if it turns out to not pay off as hoped: the guy leaves you for another woman, or he never becomes a rich lawyer... then you will have killed your precious baby in vain.
The odds are someday you will regret having killed your baby. How long ago was your abortion? The denial phase of PAS sometimes lasts for years or even a decade or more. I want you to know when that day comes there is help for you in dealing with it. There isn't exactly shortage of women of women like us who've been through the same thing.
Most likely there are PAS counseling services available in your community (and several sites online too).

reply from: ProInformed

"Plenty of people love me. And for all I know, I could've been pregnant with Stewie Griffin or something equally unloving."
"Hate speech? I don't hate anything except lowlife 'lifers."
You're young and don't realize it yet but someday you will suffer immense guilt over both killing your baby AND having such an unloving attitude towards your precious baby in order to justify it. Words could never express the deep grief and remorse I felt when I finally faced the truth. Not only did I fail to love and defend my baby and myself enough to refuse the abortion but I then went on to deny that baby, my first baby, any love or concern for another decade while I acted as if the abortion was no big deal. THAT was just as hard to deal with than the abortion istelf - the shame over failing to acknolwedge my little baby's life and death for so long. And the longer you delay facing the truth the worse it will be for you when the lies and justifications just aren't working anymore. When the protection of ignorance leaves you the abortion industry, choicer groups, and probably not even the guy you hoped would become a rich lawyer will be there to help you. But pro-lifers like myself will be.
Don't make the mistake of trusting and defending the abortion industry for years and years. They will exploit your fear of finding out the truth, but when you do learn the truth they will dump you and make it undeniably clear to you that they NEVER cared about you.
And do you REALLY hate my daughters just because they are pro-life? They're not anti-woman in any way or hateful mean girls. They are pro-life because they know some things you apparently do not (YET) know. What are you so afraid of that you have to remind yourself to keep thinking of your aborted baby as unloving/unloveable? that you have to hate pro-lifers? I understand that your fear of facing the truth, and the way pro-lifers challenge you to learn the truth, causes you to want to react angrily and defensively. After all, facing the truth WILL BE very upsetting for you. But the alternative, delaying the inevitable, extending the time your complicity and fear will be exploited to victimize even more women and babies, will only add to your eventual grief and guilt. The compassionate response is to encourage you to face the truth ASAP and then to help you deal with it.

reply from: JosieCashew

(My parents came over and made me tea afterwards and my friends pitched in and bought me a deluxe edition of the new Harry Potter book (they waited in line at midnight for me) as a gift to read while I waited. And there's no pain accept some really bad cramps.)
Awwwww! That's all so sweet I could just vomit right here and now.

reply from: LolitaOlivia

Yeah, I don't see myself ever regretting it. In fact, more women don't regret it than those who do. I've known plenty of women to get abortions and only one of them regretted it, and she's one of those women who can never stop thinking about anything. She also regrets her divorce and her decision not to go to college. Even so, she did get support from the pro-choice community and now works for a pro-choice pregnancy hotline.
I don't hate all 'lifers, just, as I call them "lowlife 'lifers". The ones who hold up disgusting pictures and bomb abortion clinics, those types.

reply from: sunnyday

LolitaOlivia,
Thank you for helping with my avatar. I tried to post that the other day but apparently it didn't go through.
Tracy

reply from: carolemarie

Yeah. All my friends know, too. They're all cool with it.
You did tell your parents? Your so-called friends are probably as misguided as you. What makes them "cool with it"? They just ignore it and accept that you have killed your child? How many abortions have you had? I read your post about the morning after abortion. Are you a repeat offender? You will understand the pain of abortion. If not now, in the future.
Only had one, though I'd get another if I ever got pregnant by accident again. They're cool with it, as in that most of them actively supported me. Many of my friends helped me to arrange it and drove me there. My parents came over and made me tea afterwards and my friends pitched in and bought me a deluxe edition of the new Harry Potter book (they waited in line at midnight for me) as a gift to read while I waited. And there's no pain accept some really bad cramps.
I am sorry that you had an abortion. But it does explain why you have to believe that it is okay and why you can't be honest about fetal development.
IIt sucks to have to believe a lie to make your self feel okay about a choice you can't undo.

reply from: jujujellybean

Yeah. All my friends know, too. They're all cool with it.
You did tell your parents? Your so-called friends are probably as misguided as you. What makes them "cool with it"? They just ignore it and accept that you have killed your child? How many abortions have you had? I read your post about the morning after abortion. Are you a repeat offender? You will understand the pain of abortion. If not now, in the future.
Only had one, though I'd get another if I ever got pregnant by accident again. They're cool with it, as in that most of them actively supported me. Many of my friends helped me to arrange it and drove me there. My parents came over and made me tea afterwards and my friends pitched in and bought me a deluxe edition of the new Harry Potter book (they waited in line at midnight for me) as a gift to read while I waited. And there's no pain accept some really bad cramps.
I am sorry that you had an abortion. But it does explain why you have to believe that it is okay and why you can't be honest about fetal development.
IIt sucks to have to believe a lie to make your self feel okay about a choice you can't undo.
Yah...CP once said she wouldn't be here trying to prove us wrong if she wasn't already convinced. Makes sense.

reply from: ProInformed

Did you tell your mother and father that you aborted their grandchild?
Yeah. All my friends know, too. They're all cool with it.
I don't doubt that for a moment.

I believe you're friends did think it was really 'cool' for you to kill your innocent baby.
And I also believe those same 'friends' would have thought it really 'uncool' for you to admit any love for your baby and to therefore refuse to abort.
So just keep spreading your legs for that guy who doesn't even love you enough to also love your baby, keep impressing your 'cool' friends with your 'coolness' (a.k.a. cold-heartedness to the point of killing your own baby) and maybe someday you will be as popular as those baby-killing celebrities you admire?
IMHO Lolita is a most appropriate posting name for you...

reply from: LolitaOlivia

Actually, a lot of them have kids. They're pro-choice. They're cool with whatever I choose.

reply from: jujujellybean

Actually, a lot of them have kids. They're pro-choice. They're cool with whatever I choose.
Do you believe that someone should have the right to kill their child?

reply from: LolitaOlivia

Actually, a lot of them have kids. They're pro-choice. They're cool with whatever I choose.
Do you believe that someone should have the right to kill their child?
If you're talking about abortion, yes. If you're talking about born children, no.

reply from: 4given

If you're talking about abortion, yes. If you're talking about born children, no.
What is the difference?

reply from: LolitaOlivia

One's born and legally a person, one's not. One's inside someone else's body, the other isn't. One is using another's body against their will, the other isn't.

reply from: LolitaOlivia

One's born and legally a person, one's not. One's inside someone else's body, the other isn't. One is using another's body against their will, the other isn't.

reply from: Teresa18

I will address in three different ways that the child has the right to life.
Just because the law doesn't recognize the unborn as persons, does not mean the unborn are not persons. The law didn't use to recognize blacks as persons at one point in time, did that mean they weren't persons? We could pass a law saying all people with alzeimhers are not persons, does that magically make them nonpersons?
One is inside their mother's body because she consented to that possibility when she had sex. There is always a possibility that sex will result in pregnancy, as that is its biological purpose. The child never asked to be concieved. The child is an unconsenting third party that resulted from a consensual act between two people in 99% of cases. It is wrong to put someone in a situation and then proceed to kill them.
A born child uses a parent's body against his/her will. The father, even if he doesn't stay around, must give part of his paycheck to the mother/child. This may mean he has to work an extra job or work more hours. The child is using his body for money whether he likes it or not. A mother has to use her physical strength to hold the child, feed the child, clothe the child, bathe the child, and sometimes even work as well. Yes, she has the option of giving the child up for adoption, but she can't just drop the child on the steps of the adoption agency in the middle of the night because she no longer wishes to care for the child. She is obligated to care for the child until someone else can care for him/her. Parents have a duty to provide for their children, at least until someone else can take care of them. When a woman is pregnant, she has a child. She has an obligation to care for her child until someone else can care for him/her, hence at birth.
According to Roe vs. Wade, the only reason abortion is legal is because they claimed the unborn child is not a person. This is from Section 9 of Roe vs. Wade:

The child does therefore have a right to live attached to his/her mother. The issue is not that one does not have the right to live attached to another's body. The issue is that the unborn child is declared not a person. Basic science shows us that an unborn child is a person, but you pro-aborts keep trying to think of subjective reasons why the unborn child is not a person so he/she is not constititutionally protected.
You pro-aborts have turned pregnancy into mother vs. child. Pregnancy should be looked at as mother with child. Real feminists would celebrate the life giving power of women, not detest it. Real feminists should be proud of being women, not envious because they are not men. You really don't care about women. If you cared, you'd help her out of the situation that makes her feel she needs to abort instead of destroying her child.

reply from: jujujellybean

That's not its fault. It didn't mean for you to get pregnant and conceive it! It had nothing to do with it. So are saying that because of YOUR mistake the child should die? Because you don't care for it that makes it worthless?

reply from: LolitaOlivia

Legally, yes. And all the people you speak of had been born.
First of all, consenting to sex is not consenting to pregnancy. And, legally, people can revoke consent at any point. It's like if a woman tells a man to stop during sex. Anything he's done after she told him to stop is rape.
Not necessarily. That's very indirect. Many men get out of child support by having their employer pay them under the table and them claim to be unemployed. And the ones that don't don't always have to work extra to pay it. Perhaps they have inheritance or just a large savings account? Perhaps they won the lottery? And even if they didn't, the government can't force them to work. Being unemployed isn't illegal yet.
Not always. Do you think Queen Elizabeth did all those things herself? Plenty of women pay people for that. Women who do it themselves either want to do it, or are required to by their means. Not by the law.
Children they consented to have. If you are pregnant and you don't have an abortion if you can legally do so, you're consenting to be a parent at least until someone else takes over. If we get rid of abortion parenthood becomes non-consensual, like rape.
Not if she doesn't consent for it to be there.
Does that make it right? I'm unsure if the issue of bodily domain was even brought up in Roe vs. Wade. And the issue of bodily domain has been held up since then. Why else would killing a fetus be manslaughter in states where abortion is legal?
If she consents to it. Men have the right to have sex with women, but only if they consent to it.
Correct!
If she is pregnant without her consent to remain so, it is. It's in her body without her consent, and she has every right to want it out of her. If a man used your body without your consent, he'd be an enemy. Why should it be different for a fetus?
We don't detest it. We just don't think the law should force it on women who don't want it. Sex should also be celebrated as something powerful. Does that mean rape should become legal?
We are proud of being women, we're just tired of men having more rights.
We do try and help women, but if a woman doesn't want to be pregnant, how is forcing her to remain pregnant going to help her?

reply from: LolitaOlivia

Actually, most people think it's fine at least through the first trimester.
No one's saying it's the fetus's fault. And technically, yes. It not being cared for does make it worthless. Why do you think it's legal to kill homeless cats and dogs in shelters but not ones with families?

reply from: LolitaOlivia

Of course they wouldn't be. Pro-life people want to limit women's rights, which of course they would be against. They'd also be pissed if I choose to join the KKK or Westboro Baptist Church.

reply from: LolitaOlivia

I never said consent had nothing to do with my position. It's one of my fundamental beliefs. Nothing should be done to someone without their consent. It's one of the fundamental legal and moral arguments for legal abortion.

reply from: LolitaOlivia

It does matter if there was consent to begin with, but consent still can be revoked. If a woman agrees to have sex with a man and then changes her mind is he allowed to keep going? Consent isn't indefinite. If a woman has a wanted pregnancy but then her boyfriend dumps her and she gets fired, she can change her mind and then get an abortion.

reply from: jujujellybean

Actually, most people think it's fine at least through the first trimester.
Really? Not according to the communist news network. 43% say only in some cases. Good job ignoring everything else I said.
No one's saying it's the fetus's fault. And technically, yes. It not being cared for does make it worthless. Why do you think it's legal to kill homeless cats and dogs in shelters but not ones with families?
Yes....you say the fetus didn't ask permission. Remember?
Really? So what if there is a newborn that isn't cared for by a single soul? Should someone be able to kill it? Its unwanted.
About cats and dogs...because they are animals. Second, I really hate the slaughter of animals too. These are human beings one of your own kind we are talking about. Hello!

reply from: LolitaOlivia

Fetuses are equal to animals. They have all the legal rights of most animals, and they don't have the intellectual capacity that separates humans from animals.
They are human, but in most other ways, including legal rights, they're closer to animals.

reply from: jujujellybean

Do your realize that slaves did too? they had LESS rights than animals in some cases. People didn't think they had an intellectual capacity either.
The thing is, even if you don't believe that a fetus should have rights, if you let it live, it would grow up and HAVE those rights. But for some reason, because it's nervous system takes a few weeks to develop, we should have the right to kill them. Nonsense.

reply from: Teresa18

CP, I welcome your input in this argument as well.
Is personhood strictly based on legal sanction, or does it transcend law?
Like I said, there is always a possibility that sex will result in pregnancy because it is the biological purpose of sex. The child is a result of a consensual act between two people in 99% of cases. The child did not ask to be concieved. The child can't control that he/she is there. This is the moral equivalent of me bringing you into my house and tossing you out in the middle of a blizzard because I no longer want you there!
Sure there will be cases where fathers are fortunate enough to not have to work. That is irrelevant. It's irrelevant because most fathers have to work, and the government can force fathers to pay child support, which may mean they have to get a second job or just a job period. Just because some fathers may not have to work extra hours or a second job, part of the income from their work is going to the child. Since they must work in order to earn money, they are using their body to earn income, part of which is going to the child. Therefore, a child can use his/her father's body against his will.
*Being paid under the table does not count because it is illegal. If the government finds out, he will go to jail.
Plenty of women do pay people for care. Once again, this is irrelevant. It's irrelevant because most women can't afford full time care and some, no care at all. She has an obligation to care for her child when no one else is able. If no one is available to hold, feed, clothe, and bathe the child, she must care for the child. Even if she is paying people for care, chances are the child is still using her body. The child is using her body because she is working and giving some of her income for the child to be able to afford care (very few women have the luxury of being in a Queen Elizabeth like situation).
Whoa! You said to CP that a woman can "revoke her consent" at any time during the pregnancy. So, she can consent to pregnancy and decide 5 months in that she doesn't want the child. She can then kill the child. So, she can "revoke her consent" while the child is in the womb, but she can't revoke it once the child is born? That is illogical.
You said it didn't matter if she did consent because she could revoke that consent. You are being logically inconsistent. You are saying that a woman can revoke her parental obligations while the child is in the womb but not once the child is out of the womb, even though I proved that the child uses her body in both circumstances.
Killing a fetus is manslaugter in states where abortion is legal because the woman wants the child and believes he/she is a person. Roe vs. Wade left personhood up to subjective opiniong through the first 9 months of life in the womb. If the child is proven to be a person, he/she is constitutionally protected under the 5th and 14th Amendments. The right to one's body is not absolute, and abortion's legality is based entirely on the premise that the unborn child is not a person.
You are getting into semantics. You know I meant to say:
Basic science shows us that an unborn child IS a person.
Please find me a scientific definition that says an unborn child is not a person.
The relationship between mother and child is a beautiful, natural thing no where comparable to rape. The woman's body was designed for pregnancy, not to be forcefully beaten and violated. It is not the same because in 99% of cases, the mother participated in an act which resulted in the child being in her womb.
The law would not be forcing women to become pregnant. The law would be saying saying that a woman does not have the right to kill her child when pregnant.
Of course not. Rape is a perversion of sex. It is not a way to celebrate sex. I believe sex should be celebrated between a man and woman in marriage.
Let me get this straight. You are "proud" of being women, but you want to be more like men?
Here's an example. Let's say a woman says she doesn't have the money to care for a child. Instead of helping her attain financial viability or donating cash and baby supplies, you tell her to kill her child. You don't want to deal with her, so you send her down to the abortuary to have her child ripped apart and tossed in a dumpster out back. I can go on.

reply from: sk1bianca

Lolita, fetuses don't have the "legal rights" of animals. their "owners" can legally kill them. so according to the "law" that you honor so much, an animal is more valuable than an unborn human being (you admitted that fetuses are human beings).
by the way, do you know any other "category" of humans that can be legally killed, except fetuses (unborn humans)?
and it's not "intellectual capacity" that makes us different than animals. it's DNA.

reply from: LolitaOlivia

But, you see, the unborn actually don't have any intellectual capacities.
Not strictly, but it is a legal term and concept as well.
You'd have every right to do that if I tried to crawl into your uterus. There's a difference.
No, it's not. It proves that the government is not forcing men to do anything with their bodies. They are forcing them to use their means, which they may or may not have earned with their bodies. And besides, if a man doesn't have a job, they can't force him to get one. They can make a fuss, but if there's no money to give...
Again, "may mean". And the uterus is a much more private area than the wallet. It's ridiculous to say the right to control one is the right to control both.
But, with a born child, plenty of people are able. Even if she can't pay someone, there's the father and friends and relatives who help out. In fact, the father is just as obligated as her to take care of them, assuming he's in the picture. And, again, these women are forced to care for children because of their means, not because of some law saying they have to. The right of children to use their wallet is very different than the right to use their body.
No, she can revoke consent once it's born. It's called adoption. And besides, once it's born it's a person and quite a bit bigger, so of course it's a bit more complicated.
If it's inside her body, and she doesn't want it, it is. And some women never want kids and don't even like children. To them there's no difference.

Which is forcing her to remain pregnant until she gives birth.
But if you think consent is irrelevant enough that a woman should be forced against her will to remain pregnant because wanted pregnancy is a beautiful thing, why should it be different for sex?
No, I just want them to have all the legal rights men have. I want them to be able to do everything men can do. I don't want society to treat them worse because they're female.
Many women would not care if such services are available, they just don't want to be pregnant. We don't tell them to do anything. Most of them could access such services if they wanted to, but it's irrelevant. They just don't want to be pregnant.
Actually, I can. A body is a body no matter who's using it or what happens to them if they stop.
Yes. You could tie the rope to a tree or find someone else to hold it. Even if you didn't, you'd only be prosecuted if it could be proven that you promised to hold the rope. And an oral contract is only worth the paper it's written on. Besides, holding a rope for the few minutes it would take for you to climb back up is a lot different than letting you live in my body for nine months.
First of all, this is accounted for. Why do you think there are co-pilots? If the pilot becomes unwilling or unable to keep flying, the co-pilot takes over. Even if he can't, there's a vast difference between doing a job you are contractually obligated to do and being forced to give your body to a fetus for nine months.

reply from: Teresa18

Please define person in the vernacular and/or scientific sense.
An unborn child doesn't just "crawl" up a woman's uterus. The child doesn't even ask to be there. The child is there due to a consensual act between the woman and a man in 99% of cases.
I think you are being deliberately obtuse. If a man is perfectly capable, he must pay child support or go to prison. Therefore, he has to get a job if not wealthy. Due to the fact that there are cases that the father must work and hand over income, there are examples of the government forcing him to use his body against his will. Working to give money to a child he does not wish to support is forcing him to use his body against his will.
Bingo. Because there are cases where a man has to pay child support and work to earn it, there are examples of forcing him to use his body against his will. It doesn't matter if that occurs in all cases. That is irrelevant. It just matters that it does occur.
You said yourself that the father is not always around, and not everyone has family or friends. The point is, the mother is obligated to care for her child if no one else wants to or is able to.
Of course she can give the child up for adoption immediately, and in some areas, within the first 40 days she may drop the child off at a fire station or hospital. However, we are talking about if she decided at first not to give the child up for adoption. She takes the child, but decides one day that she is tired of caring for the child. She is tired of using her body to work extra hours to provide for the child. She is tired using her strength holding the child, clothing the child, feeding the child, bathing the child, etc. She is the only one available to take care of the child, as in pregnancy. She can't just dump the child on the steps of the adoption agency and run off.
One example:
Can she revoke her consent and refuse to use her body to prepare a bottle for the child? What if she is and has no formula available and must breastfeed? That certainly is using her body. Can she revoke her consent and refuse to breastfeed the child?
In 99% of cases, she is responsible for the child being in her body. The child never asked to be concieved or consented to being there because the child is an innocent third party incapable of consent. It doesn't matter if she wants or likes children. When she is pregnant, she has a child. The only thing abortion does is make her the mother of a deceased child!
It is not permitting her to kill her child and forcing her to care for her child until someone else is able to.
Men do not have the legal rights to kill their own children.

reply from: jujujellybean

'But, you see, the unborn actually don't have any intellectual capacities.'
I'm telling you, that is exactly what the slave drivers that would kill them probably said when met with opposition.
'The thing is, even if you don't believe that a fetus should have rights, if you let it live, it would grow up and HAVE those rights. But for some reason, because it's nervous system takes a few weeks to develop, we should have the right to kill them. Nonsense.'
You ignored this part of my last post, btw. On purpose or accident, we will never know...

reply from: LolitaOlivia

An independent human being.
It doesn't matter if it asks to be there. It is.
No. They're using his money. If he has to work to earn money, that's a different issue.
To a certain extent. But that's a child she registered and has papers for, thus implying consent to parent.
Actually, in some areas you can. Some adoption agencies will take the child and place it in foster care immediately and work out the legal issues later.
Sure. The child can survive for a few days without it. By that time she could get some formula.
It prevents them from having to remain pregnant and give birth.
Forcing her body to provide for something she doesn't even want or like.
They have the right to control their own reproductive organs.
So? In this case actually it's true. Science agrees.
But it doesn't have them yet. A sperm, if allowed to fertilize an egg would also, after nine months, have those rights.

reply from: ProInformed

Lolita,
How long will you stubbornly persist in posting illogical and/or false excuses for defending abortion?
How old are you?
How long ago did you have your abortion?
The odds are you will not manage to stay in your pro-abortion stance forever.
You will learn more and become wiser and more mature over time...
Unless of course you are sociopathic, in which case you could maintain your hatred for innocent aborted babies over the years.

reply from: LolitaOlivia

First my excuses aren't illogical or false. Second of all, I'll be pro-choice until I die.
20
About seven months ago.
Actually, they are. Do many pro-lifers turn pro-choice? It's the same the other way around. People change opinions, but I've never met anyone as pro-choice as me who converted over.
That's a myth. We pro-choicers don't hate fetuses, we just don't think they have the right to use another's body when that person doesn't want them to.

reply from: carolemarie

First my excuses aren't illogical or false. Second of all, I'll be pro-choice until I die.
20
About seven months ago.
Actually, they are. Do many pro-lifers turn pro-choice? It's the same the other way around. People change opinions, but I've never met anyone as pro-choice as me who converted over.
That's a myth. We pro-choicers don't hate fetuses, we just don't think they have the right to use another's body when that person doesn't want them to.
1. How can one be more pro-choice than anyone else? You either are or you are not. And yes, I know many many women who were vocally pro-choice, such as myself, who was a dedicaded feminist most of my life. Heck, I am still a feminist, I have just changed my mind on abortion. I don't know any who were once pro-life and now are dedicated pro-choices however...
2. You are still just a kid, only 20 with very few life experiences behind her. Your positions will change with time, that is what happens when we grow up. It took 22 years for me to change my mind, because I finally had to admit that fundamentlally, it goes against all feminist principles to eliminate our children to make our lives easier. Logic and scientific fact beat out rhetoric and statements that made me feel okay with my choices.

reply from: LolitaOlivia

Most Americans are pro-choice, but most of them don't actively go out of their way to support choice. Just like most Americans are Christian but most don't go out of their way to attend church or follow the bible. Thus, I'm more pro-choice in the sense that I'm more devoted to the issue.
I know a couple girls who used to be pro-life. They grew up in one of those hard-core Christian house holds.
I still doubt that. My parents were pro-choice when they were my age, and they still are now.

reply from: JesusLovesYou

Hollywood is corrupt. If you're just figuring that out, that's your problem.
Well, I got the list from a pro-choice site, and I'm pretty sure women who regret it were kept off the list. Most of them women on there have actually spoken out for the pro-choice cause. The only one who might have regretted it was Wallis Simpson, but only because it was a back alley abortion and it caused her to be infertile. Though, I don't think she ever wanted children anyway.
Wasn't Wallis Simpson a Nazi whore? Shows the type of people we're dealing with here.
Edit: A pic of Wallis Simpson with her bf, Hitler:
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/MONedward8c.jpg

Isn't that interesting?

reply from: ProInformed

ProInformed: How long ago did you have your abortion?
Lolita: About seven months ago.
That explains quite a bit!
You are still in the very early stages of PAS denial!
You don't understand it yet but what you are experiencing is a common symptom of PAS. In an attempt to shield yourself from the grief and guilt you are throwing yourself into proabort advocacy and digging up any and all arguments you can think of to justify abortion. It is a desperate and usually ultimately futile way of trying to cope without facing the truth.
As time goes by you will learn MUCH more, will mature, and will discover that you didn't really 'benefit' (it won't pay off) as much as you hoped. Or you will realize that the 'benefits' you gained by killing your baby weren't really worth it and will not be able to enjoy those 'benefits' as you'd hoped.
As your life progresses you will have anniverseries and triggers to contend with:
the anniversary of the date your baby was killed, the anniversary of your baby's due date - their birthday if you hadn't killed them, the births of any future children.
IMHO you should let your parents know about your obsessiveness with defending abortion, and how it's even leading you to think and say some really bizarre, cold, and sociopathic stuff.
There is effective help available to process what you've done in a healthy way.
The coping method you are trying now is not an indication of emotional health and will ONLY continue to work at 'protecting' you from dealing with the truth at the expense of your future mental health, future relationships, and future children!
You believed in a myth and you desperately want to continue believing in it becase the alternative is so scary and horrednous. I cerntainly understand that, been there done that myself. But what you cannot see, because you haven't yet arrived to where I am, is that the healthiest and sanest way for you to recover from your abortion is to face the truth ASAP. The longer you resist because of stubborness or fear the worse the recovery will be for you when you run out of excuses to run from the truth. And YES there will be other post-aborted women who will make fun of you when you admit your sadness and when you relaize you were lied to, but a real feminist wouldn't let that stop her from speaking up in order to protect other women from the abortion industry.
You didn't just HAVE a choice that day you killed your baby, Lolita...
You have a choice every day whether or not you will continue to deny your sweet innocent baby your love and acknowledgement. And each day that you choose to shove all compassion for your slain baby aside will be adding to the weight of your guilt and grief. I KNOW this because I had an abortion myself and just like you I tried desperately, compulsively, to justify it. I am not trying to talk you into facing the reality of your baby's death because I am anti-woman or hateful, but because I want to spare you the ADDITIONAL suffering that continued denial of your baby's right to be loved by you will bring to you someday. I realize you are attempting to protect yourself but unfortunately you are only protecting abortionists while further endangering other women and babies. It would be cruel for me to expect you to face the truth if there was no help available for dealing with it. But there is PAS counseling available and I know for a fact that this horrible thign can be ovecome so that you can go on to live a happy and healthy life.
You have a choice every day:
To cowardly continue to defend an industry and a status quo that victimizes women and children becuae you hope that will protect you from the grief and guilt...
Or to become part of the brave opposition to the systematic exploitation and killing.
You can make fun of those being victimized today, tomorrow, and the next day...
Or you can speak up in heroic defense of them.
BECOME a woman worthy of the feminist label!

reply from: LolitaOlivia

LOL are you Doctor Phil or something? I don't have PAS. PAS doesn't exist. I will be pro-choice until I'm cold in my grave.

reply from: LolitaOlivia

Well, I got the list from a pro-choice site, and I'm pretty sure women who regret it were kept off the list. Most of them women on there have actually spoken out for the pro-choice cause. The only one who might have regretted it was Wallis Simpson, but only because it was a back alley abortion and it caused her to be infertile. Though, I don't think she ever wanted children anyway.
Wasn't Wallis Simpson a Nazi whore? Shows the type of people we're dealing with here.
Edit: A pic of Wallis Simpson with her bf, Hitler:
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/MONedward8c.jpg
">http://www.spartacus.schoolnet...MONedward8c.jpg
Isn't that interesting?
That picture is taken out of context. That was a political meeting between Hitler and her husband and she was obligated to attend. That was before Hitler's atrocities came out and Wallis had no reason to believe he was anything more than a slightly tyrannical, but ultimately harmless leader. I'm you you've seen the pictures prominent American leaders took with Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden.

reply from: LolitaOlivia

I don't think the child has the right to force the mother to use her body to save it, no matter what.
Then that's horrible. Parents are not slaves. Their children do not own them.
But when one agrees to a job, like flying a plane, one signs a contract and is expected to do that job or face getting fired or worse.
No, you don't. If the government is forcing your body to care for the fetus, it's no longer yours. It belongs to the government. The government has taken possession of it and you no longer have any right to it.
Yes, it's her body.

reply from: LolitaOlivia

Actually, it needs her body to live. Without it it'd die. So she is saving it.
I think parenthood should be a choice, not a legal requirement.
Women don't sign a contract promising to be pregnant for nine months at any point. Pilots do.
The government is using your body to care for the fetus, which makes it their body. That's like saying that if the government started quartering troops in your house that it's still your house. If they can take it and use it for their purposes when ever they want, it's not really yours.
I don't think parents should ever be able to kill their children. I just think they should be able to deny them the use of their bodies. If they die in the process, too bad. No one has the right to use another person's body.

reply from: ProInformed

Vexing, I have a question for you:
Do you agree with Lolita about women who were lied to or coerced to abort (and/or people who feel it is their right and civic responsibility to protect women and babies from the abortion industry)?:
"She still chose to get that abortion. If she was just upset over it, I'd feel bad for her. It's that she's trying to ban it for everyone else because she didn't like it that makes her a stupid cunt."

reply from: ProInformed

The abortion industry plus the choicist individuals, biased media, and pro-abort politicians who defend the abortion industry, all insist that women can trust the abortion clinic 'counseling' and that women are given accurate and complete info by abortion clinic 'counselors'.
So you are admitting that is a lie and that women should NOT trust the abortion industry, right?
BTW, the auto industry doesn't lie to people and tell them that it's 'safe' to drive without a seat belt. So your attempt at analogy made no sense. IF the auto industry and the media had spent 35 years assuring people that seat belts weren't necessary to ensure safety, and then when people believed that and got injured or killed in car crashes the biased media helped them cover it up, and people like you made fun of them if they tried to warn other people about the dangers of driving without seat belts, THEN the analogy would be relevent.
BTW, IMHO it is probably because you are stupid, easily fooled, and just plain mean, that you choose to defend the abortion industry instead of the women it lies to.

reply from: 4given

Celebrities haunted by their past abortions:
"I Killed a part of myself..." Actress Bette Davis speaking about her abortion in Vanity Fair, March 2006
"After abortion "my marriage was never the same. Something was gone. It broke my heart." -- Judy Garland
"The abortion itself was painful, and there was nothing to ease the pain. The procedure is demeaning; the poor woman lies flat on her back, legs up in those hateful stirrups with an impersonal tool ready to enter her body and remove something very personal. After it was over, I went in and sat in a chair and sobbed -- partly from physical pain, partly because I felt totally devastated. Since then, I've wondered how well a man could endure such an experience." -- Gennifer Flowers (had an abortion with Bill Clinton)
"I sat in the women's clinic waiting room, wondering what was going on just three rooms away as doctors (were) tearing out the brains of our child with a pair of forceps." -- Marilyn Manson
Excerpt from Sharon: The rock of the Osbournes
By JENNY JOHNSTON
You can level many charges at Sharon Osbourne, but she is brutally honest, and it is her vulnerability that makes her likeable.
"Everybody has something in the closet, and I reckon the best policy is always to be honest, then it can't come back to haunt you," she says. And she holds her hands up to her own "big mistakes". The biggest brings her to tears. "I had an abortion at 17 and it was the worst thing I ever did. It was the first time I'd had sex, and that was rotten. I'd always thought it was going to be all violins, and it was just awful." I was two months gone when I realised. I went to my mum and she said, without pausing for breath: 'You have to get rid of it.'"She told me where the clinic was, then virtually pushed me off. She was so angry. She said I'd got myself in this mess, now she had to get me out. But she didn't come. I went alone. I was terrified. It was full of other young girls, and we were all terrified and looking at each other and nobody was saying a bloody word. I howled my way through it, and it was horrible. I would never recommend it to anyone because it comes back to haunt you. When I tried to have children, I lost three - I think it was because something had happened to my cervix during the abortion. After three miscarriages, they had to put a stitch in it. In life, whatever it is, you pay somewhere down the line. You have to be accountable."

reply from: ProInformed

It is entirely possible (and our right) to do both.
The abortion industry doesn't control the internet.
We have the right and responsibility to exercise our freedom of speech and the legislative process to effect change to protect innocent human victims of violence.
Twenty-five years ago, when Kanwaljeet Anand was a medical resident in a neonatal
intensive care unit, his tiny patients, many of them preterm infants, were often
wheeled out of the ward and into an operating room. He soon learned what to expect
on their return. The babies came back in terrible shape: their skin was gray, their
breathing shallow, their pulses weak. Anand spent hours stabilizing their vital signs,
increasing their oxygen supply and administering insulin to balance their blood sugar.
"What's going on in there to make these babies so stressed?" Anand wondered.
Breaking with hospital practice, he wrangled permission to follow his patients into the
O.R. "That's when I discovered that the babies were not getting anesthesia," he
recalled recently. Infants undergoing major surgery were receiving only a paralytic
to keep them still. Anand's encounter with this practice occurred at John Radcliffe
Hospital in Oxford, England, but it was common almost everywhere. Doctors were
convinced that newborns' nervous systems were too immature to sense pain, and
that the dangers of anesthesia exceeded any potential benefits.
But Anand was not through with making observations. As NICU technology
improved, the preterm infants he cared for grew younger and younger - with
gestational ages of 24 weeks, 23, 22 - and he noticed that even the most
premature babies grimaced when pricked by a needle. "

reply from: ProInformed

If a woman gets pregnant and she dies after childbirth and it would starve unless you took hormones to cause you to lactate and feed it, would you do so?
Um... have you never heard of formula for bottle-feeding babies? sheesh! The extremes choicers go to to try to justfiy...
And yes, IF (for some bizarre reason it was not possible to feed a newborn any other way) I would take hormones to breast feed a baby that would starve otherwise. But more likely the baby would be fed by a nursemaid, a woman already breast-feeding her own baby. (Even mamma cats & dogs are humane eoungh to do that BTW.)

reply from: ProInformed

Actually you have made a false assumption if you believe that the abortion industry has a legal obligation to provide only factual information.
BTW, it's the very SAME false assumption that women going to clinics for pregnancy tests make, based on TRUSTING: the abortion industry, the medical profession, the government, the media, 'pro-choice' groups, 'pro-choice' politicians, 'pro-choice' info they were given in school, their 'pro-choice' friends and relatives...
The (little known) fact is that the abortion industry has consistently and persistently fought ALL legislative attempts to require abortionists to follow the same patient protecton right required in all other medical procedures. Abortionists, and doctors referring women for abortion, are protected from legal action if they leave out or even falsify relevent information.
I am just one of MANY women who have tried to bring legal action against the clinic that lied to me and has tried to get legislation passed that would grant pregnant women the same legal right to Informed Consent as all other patients.
Apparently you have assumed that because clincics are not being shut down for lying to women then therefore they must not be lying to women... That is a false assumption based on trust and a lack of knowledge of the current legal status of abortion.
I trusted, not because I was lazy but because people like YOU, plus the media, choicer groups, and my own friends and relatives (who also trusted) assured me that clinics are trustworthy. I would have had to be MAJORLY paranoid to NOT trust the government, those 'pro-woman' groups, and even my own friends and relatives! NOBODY warned me that I should expect the abortion clinic to lie to me and therefore I needed to go do my own research first. Really the ONLY ones who give such warnings are pro-lifers, right? But the biased media and choicers like yo do a pretty thorough job of 'warngin' women not to believe anythign the pro-lifers say, right? And choicers chastising and making fun of women AFTER they have an abortion, for being 'lazy' and trusting does NOT count as warning women BEFORE they abort! That is not done to protect women but to protect abortion.
You can't argue BOTH with honesty and integtrity:
That women CAN trust the 'pro-choice' groups...
But if they DO trust what the 'pro-choice' side claims then they are 'stupid' or 'lazy'.
Have you EVER seen one of those expensive ads the abortion industry runs ever including a warning to women to do their OWN search for info about fetal development, how abortions are done, and the possible complications BEFORE they make an appointment?
Do you know of a SINGLE case where a woman has won a lawsuit against the abortion industry based on the patient protection right of Informed Conesent (not the same as malpractice)?
Do YOU personally warn women that are pregnant that they should NOT go to an appointment at a clinic until AFTER they have done all they can to find out about the risks and what exactly their baby looks like, and what will be done to their baby, because the clinic doesn't have any responsibility to tell them the full truth?
I no longer trust the abortion industry like you still do. And the reason I no longer trust them but you still do is because I know more than you do. I won't call you names for trusting, or for not having researched beyond the slogans and assurance of those you trust, but I WILL challenge you to check it out for yourself, don't trust me OR the abortion industry. Do your own research. Instead of defending the status quo, your current POV, and the abortion industry, FIRST learn all you can with an open mind and then make a well-informed choice about which side is really pro-woman, the industry that is lying to them and exploiting them, or the side that women who have had abortions AND have learned the truth are joining.

reply from: ProInformed

http://www.yahoo.com/s/809199

reply from: ProInformed

Well for starters they tell women that abortion is 'safe', 'safer than childbirth', when the truth is at every stage of pregnancy performing abortion surgery is dangerous to the mother and more risky than natural, non-invasive, non-surgical methods of delivery. Also, the abortion industry opposes mandatory reporting requirements of abortion-caused complications and deaths, the reporting is VOLUNTARY. AND what morbidity/mortality they do bother to report can be falsely attributed to the more general category of pregnancy/childbirth - yup they very same category they point to as being less safe than abortion for comparison purposes. So they not only fail to report all abortion-caused complications, but they also report some of them as being caused by childbirth instead of abortion.
Then there are all the complications that don't show up until maybe years later when the woman who had the so-called 'safe' abortion, that they were ASSURED would not cause them any problems infuture pregnancies, has trouble getting pregnant, staying pregnant (miscarriages), has to have an unwanted C-section instead of natural birth, or their baby has a higher chance of health problems...
Even WITH the voluntary reporting leeway and with abortion complications being falsely reported as childbirth complications, the statistics still show that having had even one first trimester abortion in the past increases the risks and complications in future pregnancies.
I was told this by the staff of a birthing center, a labor coach, several nurse-midwives, several ob-gyn doctors, prenatal class instructors. I didn't believe them at first but as a member of a C-section prevention organization and as a student in a specialized prenatal class for women wanting to avoid unecessary C-sections, I was given handouts revealing studies and statistics that showed a link between abortion and complications in future pregnancies. And the birthing center that I had wanted to give birth at told me that having had just one first trimester abortion put me into the higher risk category so I would most likely be referred to the nearby hospital instead.
Of course, being pro-choice, I at first simply refused to believe any of that 'propaganda'... but most of the people giving me this info were not anti-abortion, just very strong advocates of women being given access to info about childbirth and anything that might affect their pregnancy and delivery. These were the people who told me about my legal right to Informed Consent. Most of them used a handout from the International Childbirth Education Association (not an anti-abortion group) explaining what Informed Consent is.
I didn't really believe any of what they told me for a couple of years... not until my second living baby had to be delivered by C-section too... The birthing center let me continue to have prenatal, postnatal, and general gynecological appointments with them even though it was by then obvious that I would have to go to the hospital for childbirth instead of being able to give birth at the birthing center.
One of their pro-woman policies was to allow us patients full access to our medical records. When you showed up for your appt. they basically handed you yourcomplete folder to look through while you were waiting.
That is how is how I found out that the doctor who performed my first C-section had noted that there was extensive scarring on the inside walls of my uterus caused by the abortion instrument. I had 5 miscarriages during the years I was trying to get and stay pregnant. I was told they were most likely caused by implantation problems because the pregnancy tests showed very low levels of the hormones needed to sustain pregnancy, the hormones that kick in with implantation. The urine pregnancy test sometimes said I was not pregnant but a blood test would say I was. The inside of my uterus was so scarred by the sharp-tipped suction device that it was difficult for implantation to take place and for the placenta to stay attached.
Then I found out that the reason I had to have C-sections was because my cervix would not dilate at all. They tried induction when two of my daughters were born because even though I was already in natural labor, I was not dilating at all. But even with induced labor on top of natural labor, I could not dilate. And the cause of my cervix not being able to dilate at all was the abortion. I found out that first trimester suction abortions can and should be done in a way where the cervix is gradually dilated over a period of time... BUT that abortionists didn't do it that way because they prefered the assembly line way of quickly and forcefully dilating the cervix and having the whole abortion over in a matter of minutes. My cervix had scarred from the damage of such a forceful and fast dilation and scar tissue isn't flexible enough to allow dilation during labor and delivery.
OK, despite my devotion to 'abortion rights' and my previous trust in the 'pro-choice' groups and clinics I was beginning to get a bit bothered by all this...
Yet STILL I needed to believe that SURELY that clinic I went to was just one bad apple... that overall abortion clinics cared about women and told them the truth...
Nope - I found out the clinic I went to was part of a chain that was a member of the NAF which supposedly meant it was certified as being one of the better/safer clinics, meeitng the NAF's high standards... I even tried contacting some pro-choice groups and clinics, naively thinking they would assure me that what had happened to me was indeed very rare and not the sort of thing normally tolerated. I started the phone conversation with assuring them that I was pro-choice and that the clinic I wanted to report was not their clinic, beliving they would care about what had been done to me and would make sure other women weren't being treated that way. Nope - I was cussed at, laughed at, and presumed to be a 'religious fanatic anti-abortionist' even though I assured them I was just a woman who'd had an abortion that was now having complications I'd been assured didn't exist (and an atheist too). One place even told me they were going to report me as 'theatening' and 'harrassing' them (um I had never called them before and the one phone conversation with them lasted less than 2 minutes)! I was genuinely upset and was finding out that those 'pro-choice/pro-woman' groups and clinics didn't care one bit.
BUT I STILL did NOT want to contact any anti-abortion groups! NO WAY was I gonna do that!
So I talked to a lawyer who specialized in medical lawsuits. He wasn't anti-abortion but he warned me that inside an abortion clinic the patient protection right of Informed Cosnent did not apply. And that even if I could absolutely prove what I had been told (and not told) by the clinic counselor, I could not currently win a lawsuit based on Informed Consent against anyone employed in the abortion industry! Plus he said that I probably wouldn't get anywhere in a malpractice lawsuit either because of the statutes of limitiation AND because (his words) the abortionist didn't have to have done anything wrong to cause my medical problems - that even if the abortion was done correctly those complications were likely to occur BECAUSE abortion is an inherentaly risky surgery! He also warned me that the response I got from calling a couple of pro-choice groups and clinics would most likely be the same sort of response I could expect if we went to court. He compared it to a rape trial where the defendant's lawyer attacks the woman's character, credibility, and motives. He said he'd never heard of any cases where women won in cases against abortionists based on Informed Consent being denied. BTW I was not the least bit interested in a monetary reward from that abortion clinic - I wanted to make sure they were stopped from doing the same thing to other women.

reply from: ProInformed

Another lie they told me at the abortion clinic was about fetal development.
I specifically ASKED for this info BTW. The 'nurse' ( I later learned she was not really a nurse - just dressed like one) showed us a large illustration of a uterus with absolutely NO representation at all of a fetus. She pointed to the uterus with one of those pointers professors use and 'explained' that the 'procedure' would "gently remove the lining of the uterus so that the fertilized ovum (at this point she pointed to the fallopian tube on the right side) cannot implant". I eventually learned (years later of course) that what she really was describing was more like what birth control pills do - not surgical suction abortion). I then asked her point blank why the poster didn't show what the baby looked like. She got an angry/annoyed expression, said in a tone that left no doubt she tough my question was stupid that "It's microscopic - there's nothing to show" and again pointed to the empty fallopian tube. And she also chastised me for asking too many questions (um - one question) in front of the other girl in the 'counseling' room because it might be upsetting to her. So when she was done with the 'councsling' (um sales pitch) I waited until the other girl left the room and again asked for more info. She chose that point to inform me that my blood test had come back Rho- and that meant (according to this person I believed was a nurse) "the reason you feel so sick is because your red blood cells are being killed off by the baby and the baby will die anyay".
Of course that is NOT how having a negative Rh factor works but having never heard of such a thing before and her being a 'nurse', and my feeling plenty of 'morning sickness' all day long instead of just in the morning, I believed her.
I remember feeling sort of embarrassed and silly for not wanting to have the abortion, when everyone I knew thought it was the best thing to do. I had actually agreed to go to the clinic appt. that my mother had made to find out how many weeks pregnant I was and to find out how big my baby was and what my baby looked like. I was actually counting on finding out something that would give me a good enough excuse to not abort. This was before the internet and sonograms so very few people knew anything about fetal development and we didn't have any reason to mistrust the info they would provide at the appointment. But they'd made my mom pay up front (they actually had a gate to keep people who had not paid yet from going into the waiting room), my mom would have been very angry if I didn't go through with it, and now here was this 'nurse' telling me that my baby would die and maybe I would too if I didn't have the abortion.
I was standing int he doorway of the 'counseling' room, telling the nurse I didn't want to have the abortion and wanted to leave, when she chose to 'inform' me about my negative Rh factor. The nurse put her arm around my shoulder, smiled and, escorted me to the room where the abortionist was waiting to kill my baby.
The abortion was very fast and very painful. I almost passed out and they had to put smelling salts under my nose. Oh and at one point I sort of gasped/moaned after a particularly SHARP and unexpected pain (since I had been ASSURED it would NOT be painful). I was promptly hissed at to "shut up"!
In the 'recovery' room (just a dark room with about a dozen carts with girls laying on them being fed cookies and juice) I started to cry. I was told by a woman dressed in a nurse costume (but mostly not even looking in the direction of all us girls let alone monitoring our 'recovery' in any medical way) to keep quiet because I would uspet the other girls. The other girls were getting out of that room and going home ASAP. I was still in pain, bleeding heavily, and crying (very quietly though so as not to get in trouble but the tears just would not stop). Then I was told I had to be a 'big girl' and leave - that it was taking me 'too long'... On the way home I found out my mother had been worried and asking why other girls who went in after me were already leaving.
I eventually learned the truth about having an Rh- blood type. I also eventually learned that clinics had been hiring people to pose as nurses to do counseling and were getting commissons for each abortion they sold AND that whatever they chose to tell you, or not tell you, women are not protected by a real right to Informed Consent when it comes to abortion. So even if had found out that 'nurse' was lying to me about fetal development or Rh factor the very next day, she wouldn't have been in any trouble whatsoever, with either the courts or her boss! The death of my baby was just another $25 bucks or so in her paycheck... No wonder she was smiling when she finally convinced me to start moving down the hallway towards the room the abortionist was waiting in... Maybe she bought herself some new shoes with the money she earned lying to me so I'd agree to let them rip my little baby apart? I wonder if she and the other employees later laughed about my trusting her and believing her?

reply from: ProInformed

I was still pro-choice but also pro-informed for a few years after I started learning and trying to deal with the truth.
During that time I attended a pro-choice event where Molly Yard was the speaker.
When they had the Q&A session after her speech I asked her why women who are having abortions shouldn't have the patient protection right of Informed Consent.
She responded as if she didn't know about so I simply said: "I had some complications from my abortion that the clinic didn't warn me about".
She ignored my question and took the next question from another audience member. Somebody yelled something about "who let her in here?" This was an event advertised and open to the general public and I was still pro-choice anyway. There were some anti-abortionists in the back of the room holding some signs but I was not with them! Two college-aged girls sitting to my left started cussing at me and one hissed: "It's your own damn fault". I tried to tellmyself they must be anti-abortion fanatics that were mad because I'd had an abortion... but they were applauding all the pro-abort statements...
Years later, after I had become pro-life, I was one of several women who testified to in a state legislative attempt to grant women who were considering abortion the patient protection right of Informed Consent. There were some militant pro-abort women there who were not scheduled to testify on either side, apparently they were there for the purpose of hissing obscentities at us while we waited our turn to speak. One of the pro-life women who had an abortion in her past was effectively bullied into leaving without giving her testimony.

reply from: carolemarie

Well for starters they tell women that abortion is 'safe', 'safer than childbirth', when the truth is at every stage of pregnancy performing abortion surgery is dangerous to the mother and more risky than natural, non-invasive, non-surgical methods of delivery. Also, the abortion industry opposes mandatory reporting requirements of abortion-caused complications and deaths, the reporting is VOLUNTARY. AND what morbidity/mortality they do bother to report can be falsely attributed to the more general category of pregnancy/childbirth - yup they very same category they point to as being less safe than abortion for comparison purposes. So they not only fail to report all abortion-caused complications, but they also report some of them as being caused by childbirth instead of abortion.
Then there are all the complications that don't show up until maybe years later when the woman who had the so-called 'safe' abortion, that they were ASSURED would not cause them any problems infuture pregnancies, has trouble getting pregnant, staying pregnant (miscarriages), has to have an unwanted C-section instead of natural birth, or their baby has a higher chance of health problems...
Even WITH the voluntary reporting leeway and with abortion complications being falsely reported as childbirth complications, the statistics still show that having had even one first trimester abortion in the past increases the risks and complications in future pregnancies.
I was told this by the staff of a birthing center, a labor coach, several nurse-midwives, several ob-gyn doctors, prenatal class instructors. I didn't believe them at first but as a member of a C-section prevention organization and as a student in a specialized prenatal class for women wanting to avoid unecessary C-sections, I was given handouts revealing studies and statistics that showed a link between abortion and complications in future pregnancies. And the birthing center that I had wanted to give birth at told me that having had just one first trimester abortion put me into the higher risk category so I would most likely be referred to the nearby hospital instead.
Of course, being pro-choice, I at first simply refused to believe any of that 'propaganda'... but most of the people giving me this info were not anti-abortion, just very strong advocates of women being given access to info about childbirth and anything that might affect their pregnancy and delivery. These were the people who told me about my legal right to Informed Consent. Most of them used a handout from the International Childbirth Education Association (not an anti-abortion group) explaining what Informed Consent is.
I didn't really believe any of what they told me for a couple of years... not until my second living baby had to be delivered by C-section too... The birthing center let me continue to have prenatal, postnatal, and general gynecological appointments with them even though it was by then obvious that I would have to go to the hospital for childbirth instead of being able to give birth at the birthing center.
One of their pro-woman policies was to allow us patients full access to our medical records. When you showed up for your appt. they basically handed you yourcomplete folder to look through while you were waiting.
That is how is how I found out that the doctor who performed my first C-section had noted that there was extensive scarring on the inside walls of my uterus caused by the abortion instrument. I had 5 miscarriages during the years I was trying to get and stay pregnant. I was told they were most likely caused by implantation problems because the pregnancy tests showed very low levels of the hormones needed to sustain pregnancy, the hormones that kick in with implantation. The urine pregnancy test sometimes said I was not pregnant but a blood test would say I was. The inside of my uterus was so scarred by the sharp-tipped suction device that it was difficult for implantation to take place and for the placenta to stay attached.
Then I found out that the reason I had to have C-sections was because my cervix would not dilate at all. They tried induction when two of my daughters were born because even though I was already in natural labor, I was not dilating at all. But even with induced labor on top of natural labor, I could not dilate. And the cause of my cervix not being able to dilate at all was the abortion. I found out that first trimester suction abortions can and should be done in a way where the cervix is gradually dilated over a period of time... BUT that abortionists didn't do it that way because they prefered the assembly line way of quickly and forcefully dilating the cervix and having the whole abortion over in a matter of minutes. My cervix had scarred from the damage of such a forceful and fast dilation and scar tissue isn't flexible enough to allow dilation during labor and delivery.
OK, despite my devotion to 'abortion rights' and my previous trust in the 'pro-choice' groups and clinics I was beginning to get a bit bothered by all this...
Yet STILL I needed to believe that SURELY that clinic I went to was just one bad apple... that overall abortion clinics cared about women and told them the truth...
Nope - I found out the clinic I went to was part of a chain that was a member of the NAF which supposedly meant it was certified as being one of the better/safer clinics, meeitng the NAF's high standards... I even tried contacting some pro-choice groups and clinics, naively thinking they would assure me that what had happened to me was indeed very rare and not the sort of thing normally tolerated. I started the phone conversation with assuring them that I was pro-choice and that the clinic I wanted to report was not their clinic, beliving they would care about what had been done to me and would make sure other women weren't being treated that way. Nope - I was cussed at, laughed at, and presumed to be a 'religious fanatic anti-abortionist' even though I assured them I was just a woman who'd had an abortion that was now having complications I'd been assured didn't exist (and an atheist too). One place even told me they were going to report me as 'theatening' and 'harrassing' them (um I had never called them before and the one phone conversation with them lasted less than 2 minutes)! I was genuinely upset and was finding out that those 'pro-choice/pro-woman' groups and clinics didn't care one bit.
BUT I STILL did NOT want to contact any anti-abortion groups! NO WAY was I gonna do that!
So I talked to a lawyer who specialized in medical lawsuits. He wasn't anti-abortion but he warned me that inside an abortion clinic the patient protection right of Informed Cosnent did not apply. And that even if I could absolutely prove what I had been told (and not told) by the clinic counselor, I could not currently win a lawsuit based on Informed Consent against anyone employed in the abortion industry! Plus he said that I probably wouldn't get anywhere in a malpractice lawsuit either because of the statutes of limitiation AND because (his words) the abortionist didn't have to have done anything wrong to cause my medical problems - that even if the abortion was done correctly those complications were likely to occur BECAUSE abortion is an inherentaly risky surgery! He also warned me that the response I got from calling a couple of pro-choice groups and clinics would most likely be the same sort of response I could expect if we went to court. He compared it to a rape trial where the defendant's lawyer attacks the woman's character, credibility, and motives. He said he'd never heard of any cases where women won in cases against abortionists based on Informed Consent being denied. BTW I was not the least bit interested in a monetary reward from that abortion clinic - I wanted to make sure they were stopped from doing the same thing to other women.[/q
Wow! This is absolutely horrible and disgusting that a service sold to women as health care relies on deception and lies...your very brave to share it!

reply from: wemustcrushabortion

Well, I got the list from a pro-choice site, and I'm pretty sure women who regret it were kept off the list. Most of them women on there have actually spoken out for the pro-choice cause. The only one who might have regretted it was Wallis Simpson, but only because it was a back alley abortion and it caused her to be infertile. Though, I don't think she ever wanted children anyway.
what are you talking about all the women on silentnomore are prolife now

reply from: nancyu

Well for starters they tell women that abortion is 'safe', 'safer than childbirth', when the truth is at every stage of pregnancy performing abortion surgery is dangerous to the mother and more risky than natural, non-invasive, non-surgical methods of delivery. Also, the abortion industry opposes mandatory reporting requirements of abortion-caused complications and deaths, the reporting is VOLUNTARY. AND what morbidity/mortality they do bother to report can be falsely attributed to the more general category of pregnancy/childbirth - yup they very same category they point to as being less safe than abortion for comparison purposes. So they not only fail to report all abortion-caused complications, but they also report some of them as being caused by childbirth instead of abortion.
Then there are all the complications that don't show up until maybe years later when the woman who had the so-called 'safe' abortion, that they were ASSURED would not cause them any problems infuture pregnancies, has trouble getting pregnant, staying pregnant (miscarriages), has to have an unwanted C-section instead of natural birth, or their baby has a higher chance of health problems...
Even WITH the voluntary reporting leeway and with abortion complications being falsely reported as childbirth complications, the statistics still show that having had even one first trimester abortion in the past increases the risks and complications in future pregnancies.
I was told this by the staff of a birthing center, a labor coach, several nurse-midwives, several ob-gyn doctors, prenatal class instructors. I didn't believe them at first but as a member of a C-section prevention organization and as a student in a specialized prenatal class for women wanting to avoid unecessary C-sections, I was given handouts revealing studies and statistics that showed a link between abortion and complications in future pregnancies. And the birthing center that I had wanted to give birth at told me that having had just one first trimester abortion put me into the higher risk category so I would most likely be referred to the nearby hospital instead.
Of course, being pro-choice, I at first simply refused to believe any of that 'propaganda'... but most of the people giving me this info were not anti-abortion, just very strong advocates of women being given access to info about childbirth and anything that might affect their pregnancy and delivery. These were the people who told me about my legal right to Informed Consent. Most of them used a handout from the International Childbirth Education Association (not an anti-abortion group) explaining what Informed Consent is.
I didn't really believe any of what they told me for a couple of years... not until my second living baby had to be delivered by C-section too... The birthing center let me continue to have prenatal, postnatal, and general gynecological appointments with them even though it was by then obvious that I would have to go to the hospital for childbirth instead of being able to give birth at the birthing center.
One of their pro-woman policies was to allow us patients full access to our medical records. When you showed up for your appt. they basically handed you yourcomplete folder to look through while you were waiting.
That is how is how I found out that the doctor who performed my first C-section had noted that there was extensive scarring on the inside walls of my uterus caused by the abortion instrument. I had 5 miscarriages during the years I was trying to get and stay pregnant. I was told they were most likely caused by implantation problems because the pregnancy tests showed very low levels of the hormones needed to sustain pregnancy, the hormones that kick in with implantation. The urine pregnancy test sometimes said I was not pregnant but a blood test would say I was. The inside of my uterus was so scarred by the sharp-tipped suction device that it was difficult for implantation to take place and for the placenta to stay attached.
Then I found out that the reason I had to have C-sections was because my cervix would not dilate at all. They tried induction when two of my daughters were born because even though I was already in natural labor, I was not dilating at all. But even with induced labor on top of natural labor, I could not dilate. And the cause of my cervix not being able to dilate at all was the abortion. I found out that first trimester suction abortions can and should be done in a way where the cervix is gradually dilated over a period of time... BUT that abortionists didn't do it that way because they prefered the assembly line way of quickly and forcefully dilating the cervix and having the whole abortion over in a matter of minutes. My cervix had scarred from the damage of such a forceful and fast dilation and scar tissue isn't flexible enough to allow dilation during labor and delivery.
OK, despite my devotion to 'abortion rights' and my previous trust in the 'pro-choice' groups and clinics I was beginning to get a bit bothered by all this...
Yet STILL I needed to believe that SURELY that clinic I went to was just one bad apple... that overall abortion clinics cared about women and told them the truth...
Nope - I found out the clinic I went to was part of a chain that was a member of the NAF which supposedly meant it was certified as being one of the better/safer clinics, meeitng the NAF's high standards... I even tried contacting some pro-choice groups and clinics, naively thinking they would assure me that what had happened to me was indeed very rare and not the sort of thing normally tolerated. I started the phone conversation with assuring them that I was pro-choice and that the clinic I wanted to report was not their clinic, beliving they would care about what had been done to me and would make sure other women weren't being treated that way. Nope - I was cussed at, laughed at, and presumed to be a 'religious fanatic anti-abortionist' even though I assured them I was just a woman who'd had an abortion that was now having complications I'd been assured didn't exist (and an atheist too). One place even told me they were going to report me as 'theatening' and 'harrassing' them (um I had never called them before and the one phone conversation with them lasted less than 2 minutes)! I was genuinely upset and was finding out that those 'pro-choice/pro-woman' groups and clinics didn't care one bit.
BUT I STILL did NOT want to contact any anti-abortion groups! NO WAY was I gonna do that!
So I talked to a lawyer who specialized in medical lawsuits. He wasn't anti-abortion but he warned me that inside an abortion clinic the patient protection right of Informed Cosnent did not apply. And that even if I could absolutely prove what I had been told (and not told) by the clinic counselor, I could not currently win a lawsuit based on Informed Consent against anyone employed in the abortion industry! Plus he said that I probably wouldn't get anywhere in a malpractice lawsuit either because of the statutes of limitiation AND because (his words) the abortionist didn't have to have done anything wrong to cause my medical problems - that even if the abortion was done correctly those complications were likely to occur BECAUSE abortion is an inherentaly risky surgery! He also warned me that the response I got from calling a couple of pro-choice groups and clinics would most likely be the same sort of response I could expect if we went to court. He compared it to a rape trial where the defendant's lawyer attacks the woman's character, credibility, and motives. He said he'd never heard of any cases where women won in cases against abortionists based on Informed Consent being denied. BTW I was not the least bit interested in a monetary reward from that abortion clinic - I wanted to make sure they were stopped from doing the same thing to other women.
Wow! This is absolutely horrible and disgusting that a service sold to women as health care relies on deception and lies...your very brave to share it!
I like the way cm pretends to be so shocked and outraged here. This is a great post by ProInformed that everyone should read.

reply from: BossMomma

That has-been needs to be sterilized, not given abortions.

reply from: BossMomma

So what was the point of this?

reply from: Shenanigans

I think the real question is what is the point of bumping a two year old thread?

reply from: Ana

No sure, but it seems to happen around here a lot.

reply from: Shenanigans

No sure, but it seems to happen around here a lot.
Yeah, I"m guessing people either have no life outside their computer, or they haven't discovered the wonders of Farmville. Oh heck, that reminds me, I gotta go feed my puppy!

reply from: jack154

Ladies and Gents, hate to tell you this but this is 2011.
R v Wade occurred in 1973. Regardless of how you feel, for 38 years abortion on demand in the first two trimesters has been the law of the land.
Isn't it time to focus your energy on something else - like domestic violence, or unemployment, or ANYTHING other than continuing the same old argument on the abortion issue - that's a settled case.
I actually lean toward pro-life, but hate to see people tilting at windmills - especially when their energy could be used so much more efficiently solving other societal problems. Tell me, what progress have you made in the abortion debate since 1973?

reply from: AshMarie88

Jack, tons of babies have been SAVED since 1973. If it weren't for pro-lifers, all of those saved children would not be alive right now. EVERY LITTLE BIT HELPS!


2014 ~ LifeDiscussions.org ~ Discussions on Life, Abortion, and the Surrounding Politics