Pro-life is Neither Anti-birth Control … Nor Disregarding of the Newborn
In an effort to undermine the specific pro-life position, the pro-abortion community distracts into unrelated and irrelevant issues.
Birth control and contraception
The first of these is to suggest that pro-lifers are against birth control through contraceptive methods that prevent the fertilization of the female egg cell. In fact, most pro-lifers are strongly supportive of methods that would prevent conception – the point when the new life has all the DNA attributes of a human being. Virtually all the physical traits of the later person are already contained in the DNA. That is the beginning of the development of a human being. That is beyond refutation.
Birth control prevents the creation of a developing human being and negates any later consideration of abortion. Birth control is a good thing – both in terms of technology and education. Pro-lifers also believe in moral and abstinence education.
Yes … I know that certain religious groups have moral objections to contraception and the “spilling of the seed,” but those issues do not drive the pro-life, anti-abortion folks – and they have virtually no impact on public policy. I have yet to see even the most religious folks lobbying for legislation to ban masturbation or the use of condoms.
Preventing pregnancies precludes the later question of abortion. Contraception is a pro-life position.
Heartless disregard for the newborn
This is one of the more heartless and nonsensical accusations leveled at pro-lifers – and egregiously wrong. Basically, the charge is that while pro-lifers want to save the life of the developing human being (true), they care nothing about what happens to the unwanted child after birth (false).
Those who proffer that argument intimate – and even claim – that the child will have a profoundly unhappy life – subject to neglect and abuse. He or she will suffer from a lack of resources – such as food and medical care – because of the impoverishment of the single mother. For the pro-abortion folks, the example is most often a single minority mother. (Talk about racist stereotyping).
The first problem with that malicious claim is that the vast majority of pro-life institutions provide adoption services for women who prefer to give up their child. Often that decision is based on the mother’s belief that the child will have a “better life” with a different family – partially dispelling the contention that all those unaborted babies will live in misery – or turn out to be anti-social adults.
I recall Jerry Falwell saying that pro-lifers are obligated to address the wellbeing of the newborn. For his part, he launched a major adoption program within his ministry. Statistically, pro-lifers – and conservatives in general – are the most likely to adopt.
Those who proffer the heartless pro-lifer propaganda fail to take into consideration that there is a network of the private sector and religious voluntary charitable support groups – food pantries, and community daycare.
It is no small irony that the critics who say the unaborted children will not have the support of pro-lifers and society, in general, seem to have forgotten about all the government programs at the federal, state, and municipal levels that provided direct and indirect support to children and families with children. Such programs as an aid to dependent children, school lunch programs, school counselors, SNAP (food stamps), rent assistance, free clinics, etc., etc., etc.
America provides enormous support for children at risk – whether from government or private sector efforts AND is uniquely provided by the pro-life community. To say that pro-lifers do not care about the unaborted babies – or do nothing to support them – is just another leftwing false propaganda narrative … period.
Summary
Rather than waste time on irrelevant or phony issues, we should concentrate on the central issue of abortion – and that is the determination of when the developing human being in the womb has the inalienable and constitutional right to life. Everything else is political flak.
So, there ‘tis.
Oye. Do you have any actual statistics to back up you claims?
I know:
– everyone knows it
– look it up
– you don’t have time
– repeat.
A woman is attacked, Your daughter, Wife, your close family. She is pregnant with a baby from the attack or Rape as it may be.
Pro life wants that woman to have the baby, then keep it? Give it up? Yes , it is a human being but the attack is an ugly thing.
Pro life wants that woman to be reminded or guilted every day and in every way what she felt she needed to do is wrong and never to forget what happened.
I am all for no abortions’ because a couple felt it was the wrong time to have a baby. To bad, you knew what your were doing when you
took the chance were a child could be made.
I do believe a child that has not left the mother and posses death to the mother if delivered should be delivered.
This was the thinking thousands of years ago before modern medicine had a better idea of what the consequences were.
The only thing wrong with Pro Choice is they do not know were to stop!
Pro Life goes to far on the other direction.
Graham changed a few laws before the mid terms, I feel that cost the red wave from happening.
I know first hand younger voters that looked directly at the stance of individuals running on this position.
NO abortions No matter what. They went directly to the Blue side.
I know this should not be an election decision, BUT IT IS!
A mother should have the right to choose but ONLY were there is Incest, Rape, or danger to here safety.
That is just me.
+1. I like it Darren. Because that’s the point, the choice is yours and no one can void your privacy on that.
The question remains what are the boundary conditions we consider as a determination of a life protected by the Constitution since no one wants to allow the offing of babies as they pop out and are deemed too ugly. As Larry has noted in the past, that’s an argument for the ages, let the States figure that one out. But at conception? Rape babies? Incest babies? Unviable babies? It’s sounds impossible, but it’s happening in places. They can tell you about God’s will, but it’s their God, we have freedom of religion here to choose our God. And their God tells us we have free will. My God too.
Larry is allowed his point of view, yet he chooses to enrage and inflame pro choice folks with his chosen rhetoric for personal reasons making his treatise an attack, not a discussion or even a vantage point. He purposely puts off pro choice folks from the git go of his scurrilous screed.
Gottta love Larry’s supporting statistics — illuminating and thoughtful. NOT. Hate to put meat on those bones when you focus on tossing red meat to your fans. Hard to change minds without facts, especially when you mistakenly generalize them in a bad light to begin with. No one is pro abortion Larry. No one.
I have two issues: one is Larry keeps saying hinting that most pro-lifers are not what pro-choicer’s are claiming which is true. But the sad part is some are, and in some places they may be codifying this shit. Remember always: Roe v Wade was the law of the land for over half a century and 7 people took it away. They, and Larry, told us while it’s a State’s issue, there will always be availability in some State. Except in six states, laws are being considered to stop people from going out of state, up to five years in jail even just for driving. The entire South has a hodge-podge of different complex bans, except for SC of all places so it’s getting to be huge expensive journey for some. Doctors, patients, legal —-> anyone involved in this needs a Masters just to determine what the current laws are.
So, I agree with Larry it’s not all why pro-choicer’s , it’s a variety, it’s here and there. But this shit is being attempted to be codified in a number places and that’s terrible. And extremely confusing and difficult for our citizens to understand and comprehend. As if those in need don’t have enough on their minds.
There is enlightening news: SC halt the near total abortion ban selected by most of the South for the third time! Given abortion is banned from North Carolina to Texas, South Carolina has become a oasis for Southern women in trouble, in need.
The second issue with Larry’s article is with his stupid usage of the term “pro-abortion” which is used to keep folks off center as if cheerleaders for abortion. No one is pro abortion. Larry knows this all to well but likes to throw red meat to his fans. Fuel to the fire. No one is for aborting a pregnancy, we are for allowing women to choose their reproductive futures. We are for freedom of choice. We are pro-choice. Grant each individual the liberty and privacy to freely select how to handle their own pregnancy and keep your jack-booted government thugs out of women’s wombs.
There are a scads of organizations that have pro-choice in their name. There is not one pro-abortion organization. No organization features “pro-abortion” in their name, their mission, or their mantra. To be honest and comprehensive, there are professional medical societies and organizations with the word abortion in their title, but no pro-abortion organizations.
I suggest that if Larry wants to have an honest and open discussion that he use the proper terminology and avoid the demeaning bogus hate speak moniker he thinks is fashionable. Only to the folks who agree already and need him to toss some red meat to get those juices rolling.
FYI: last night I re-watched the 1959 movie “A Summer Place.” Gotta love the song. Great color. It’s portrays some dilemmas faced by The Greatest Generation, and their kids, coming of age. Amazing how the issues don’t change no matter how far we have come, we have a long way to go even to show progress, and how much we can do better. Gotta love a penultimate moment where Mom and Dad are discussing the situation with sage wisdoms. Dad then enters teenage daughter’s room and basically says: “STFU, I’m your Dad…..”
Frank Stetson … There you go again. Presuming to know what Larry Horist thinks … knows … is motivated by. The fact that you are utterly wrong mean nothing to you. But you prop up that straw man Larry Horst because you are incapable of going toe-to-toe with real arguments. You just make arrogant claims — such as calling pro-choice the “proper” terminology. When I see folks advocating abortion on demand, they are fighting FOR abortion … pro-abortion. When abortion legislation comes up, one side is against and one side is for — con and pro. If you want to label me as anti-abortion, I would gladly accept that moniker. Pro-life or anti-abortion are legitimately interchangeable – as are pro-abortion and pro-choice. You are FOR legalized abortion but you are not PRO abortion. LOL. Tell me another one. And like a typical abortion advocate, you do not like the fact that most Americans oppose later abortions – most support bans after the first trimester – with the number reaching 70 percent against third trimester abortion according most polling. The pro-abortion argument is based on concealing and denying truths and science. I see you hissy fits about irrelevant issues as evidence that you cannot deal with the central questions of the existence of life.
You are correct. So many read your pieces yet have not a clue what you mean.
Thanks for the supporting statistics.
Frank Stetson … You can only speak for yourself and I understand the problem.
Larry, I tend to lean in your direction regarding the names pro-life and pro-abortion because most of what I see from the pro-choice side seems to be abortion. But to me this is a small issue, may as well argue about how to pronounce the word “tomato”. Is it a long “A” or a short “a”. So I will give you +1.
I am not leaning in your direction on the statement, “I see you hissy fits about irrelevant issues as evidence that you cannot deal with the central questions of the existence of life.”. The use of “hissy” sound like a conservative “reverse Mr. Lemon” to me so lets discard your abuse and condescending Mr. Lemon attitude, and deal with just the facts that Frank is attempting to portray. Much of what Frank mentions are human situations which are precisely the issues that are really all of the “in-betweens” getting caught up in this ideological abortion tryst. Frank is wanting a system that addresses all of the in-betweens and wanting women to have the choice in what they feel is their best successful outcome. And abortion has to be a part of that solutions portfolio. Frank has been rather flexible, including on the existence of life. You have been rather inflexible on the human conditions once that life exists, and disingenuous on the support systems for the continued existence of that human life. So I will give Frank +1.
I see Larry Horst just as Larry Horist sees Frank Stetson because you are incapable of going toe-to-toe with real arguments that I have presented such as tax increases and system developments that will take funding and manpower. You have never answered me on the tax increases, successful life outcomes for women portfolio of solutions, and now you mention community supports. You just make arrogant claims that all of the support systems you mention exist (seamingly in abundance) in all of the states. This is blatantly false!!!! And many of those support systems depend on healthy economies, something you do not take into consideration. And it does no good when you cut Medicaid services and put in past budgets to cut preventive measures such as birth control which the GOP has done! And in NC they tried to sneak through the budget cutting meals on wheels and other food support services!!! And you have not addressed the transportation systems that do not exist to get to some of these supports. Often people who need these services also have other issues such as cars that do not run, or cannot afford gas, etc. What good is a food bank you cannot get to!!! Perhaps had you stayed in Chicago and moved to a poor area of color instead of to plush Boca, you might understand the depth and breadth of poverty that some of these folks experience! Frank at least tries to understand all of these people. Frank +1
Final score: Frank 2, Larry 1
Frank, Most conservatives base their reaction to a given subject on emotion, as opposed to logic. That’s why Larry writes the way he does-attempting to stir up the base. If you look at issues from a logical viewpoint, none of the conservative issues make sense. And yet we seem to be stuck with laws that reinforce the conservative viewpoint-not because the majority of the population feels that way, but because elected officials believe they can be re-elected by passing such laws. Unfortunately in many cases the silent majority is just that-silent…
Sorry, mf, I think we all pretty much the same in that and Larry better than “most conservatives.”
Frank, I certainly do understand and feel your passion on this issue. Seems like Larry needs to juice of his readership numbers after two snoozers, AI, and Lemon/Tucker. I am not going to engage with this conversation anymore because I have said all I need to say earlier, and Larry has given no responses to tax increase to support their side’s position.
A point of clarification regarding abortion in NC. The latest is this: Abortion is currently banned after 20 weeks, 6 days of pregnancy in North Carolina due to a North Carolina law that has gone into effect. It is legal to travel out of state to get an abortion. See this site for all states, they seem to be up to snuff on the states I checked: *https://www.abortionfinder.org/abortion-guides-by-state/abortion-in-north-carolina* So I personally feel NC has a fairly reasonable position on the topic. And we have many other options or as you say, “choices”. Where Larry is mistaken is that he generalizes community support options as being widely available in all states, and that is simply not true. Many states are struggling and these community supports vary with economy of the state. In NC, just this year we expanded Medicaid – some of what Larry says was not available in NC before this. We do have food banks and much of the community supports Larry mentions, but we do not have good public transportation to get to these places! And if Larry’s buddies do not raise the debt ceiling and get into a brawl with Biden, this will stop many of these services during the 20 weeks when a person must decide their reproductive choice. Even preventive measures that Larry speaks of such as birth control, condoms, etc. will be affected! So there is incentive on this issue for pro-life folks not to increase the debt limit. And in the future, from what I have seen of the proposed budget cuts, some of these supports appear on the chopping block.
I fully understand Larry’s view as well as your view. I think there are good points to both. I think Darren is incorrect as I seem to recall Larry was ok with abortion for rape, incest, and endangerment to the mother – and so is the Christian bible!!!. I have not heard him discuss crack babies, tubal pregnancies, still births, severe deformities, (all of the in-betweens caught up in the ideological meat grinder ) and any tax increases to increase the capacity of our social support system to handle these human tragedies. etc.
When can we stop the ideological argument that gets us nowhere but PBP readership, and start to focus on the problem. When will both sides agree that the issue is successful life outcomes for women? A discussion on this topic where all solutions, including abortion, are discussed and put into play with understandable boundaries is what we need. Many of us Independents are tired of the ideological debates that get nowhere and no results. Pro-life and Pro-choice are both ideological sides of the same “no results burger”. Independents realize no solution set will ever be perfect, but we want results, not arguments. And most Independents I know favor a portfolio of solutions from both sides, and reasonable guidelines.
+1 Tom and I agree: “I am not going to engage with this conversation anymore because I have said all I need to say earlier, and Larry has given no responses”
We have 50 years, probably more, of not changing hearts n minds on this one, don’t expect that to change.
But I will jump up when someone calls me pro-abortion and the fact that Larry is OK with me calling him anti-abortion is just stupid logic that could never anyone’s mind on this. I would rather call him Spanky.
Yes I think the epitome of being inflexible is not answering on the issues when invited to do so.
Yeah I like that name Spanky. Seems warm and playful, like Spanky and the Gang. Ahh those were the days! :>)
Tom: get ready — from what I understand, after the recent NC gerrymandering, you be heading farther South, sooner rather than later. Hope folks can keep NC on the purple path……
Tom … I thought I made myself clear in the past. We are not pen pals. We are not engaged in a prolonged debate — of which I have neither the time or interest in pursing. I am not obsessed with bickering and responding to sarcasm, insults, snide remarks and every bit of disinformation that pops up here. You use the wrong word when you opine that I am “incapable” of responding — or “inflexible.” The word you are looking for is “unwilling.” I know you and Frank are totally committed to the game of political banter and judgmental refereeing, but it does not capture my interests. I already give you guys more time than is should — and your deserve..
Larry, While advertising yourself as pro-life, you are correctly described as ‘anti-abortion’ (though I know that the term pro-life is a misnomer commonly used for people who are anti-abortion). It is far more accurate to describe the ‘pro-choice’ people as pro-life. You believe that the government needs to control decisions that rightly should be made between the actual parties involved-in this case the pregnant woman and her doctor. This is the same ‘big bad government’ that you rail against in other posts as being too controlling. As you should be aware, it is impossible for the government to write laws to cover all situations, especially for an issue that is as complicated as abortion. The situations that have been in the news since Roe v Wade should make that clear. Women who have developed problems with their pregnancies have been denied abortions in red states, women (and girls) who have been raped have been denied abortions in red states. I have heard you say that you would be in favor of allowing an abortion in some (or all) of those cases, but the simple fact of the matter is they are not. Doctors are afraid of losing their licenses in red states if they perform an abortion, so abortions are not happening. I am far more concerned about the life of a young (or older) rape victim, or a woman who desperately needs an abortion for a medical reason than for the life of an ‘unviable’ fetus. Clearly, Roe v Wade needs to be reinstated, and leave the decision where it belongs-to the woman involved, and her ethically obligated doctor….
Mikef … As an advocate of abortion, you show a totally disregard for the live of the developing human being. You also give no consideration to the role, rights or interests of the father — who is one-half of the new life. Being pro-life properly reflects the concern for the unborn. Abortion is not a legal or constitutional right not matter how much the pro-abortion community makes that political claim. Until there can be agreement on when in the process the developing human being gains the rights of a person, debate is useless. It is just the same only arguments going around and around..
I agree with you that there must be discussion on the issues, and agreement can not happen without discussion.
Now Larry, your generalization of fathers is correct, there are some fathers that do care. I was one of those fathers back in 1975. Now having said that, many fathers do not care and do not have any intention of marrying the woman or supporting the child. And I would venture to say more dead beat unresponsive fathers that do not care outnumber the ones that do care. And many of them cannot be found and courts cannot force a paternity test in some states. And in other cases the man is pathetic and does not work or have income. So, let’s get specific here, how would you handle this for all of the women abandoned by men that just wanted sex without responsibility? Lets come to agreement on what to do so we can all be pro-life on this situation??? How much of a tax increase would you like or agree to in order to cover all of these abandoned women? Come on Larry, talk the issue so we can have agreement!
Larry you also generalize community support options as being widely available in all states, and that is simply not true. Many states are struggling and these community supports vary with economy of the state. In NC, just this year we expanded Medicaid – some of what Pro-life Larry says was not available in NC before this. We do have food banks and much of the community supports Pro-life Larry mentions, but we do not have good public transportation to get to these places! And if Pro-life Larry’s buddies do not raise the debt ceiling and get into a brawl with Biden, this will stop many of these services during the 20 weeks when a person must decide their reproductive choice (abortion is legal up to 20th week in NC) . Even preventive measures that Pro-life Larry speaks of such as birth control, condoms, etc. will be affected! So there is incentive on this issue for some pro-life folks not to increase the debt limit. And in the future, from what I have seen of the proposed budget cuts, some of these supports appear on the chopping block. So tell me what Pro-life Larry recommends for these situations??? I am willing to talk, and come to an agreement. Are you ready Pro-Life Larry? How do we solve the transportation problem? How do we ensure birth control, condoms, and other preventive measures are immune from budget cuts and protected from economic downturns and freely accessible to everyone? And will the food programs in every state include baby formula, food, diapers, OTC meds, etc. and be an easy to enroll process? What do you propose Pro-Life Larry? And lets talk about when men should pay child support, which I believe should be the support payments start when the woman gets pregnant, do you agree? And if support payments require a paternity genetic test, are you in favor of the government ordering you to report for such a test? And a stiff penalty, say five years in prison if they do not report or repeatedly evade reporting? Please Please Pro-life Larry, write an article that discusses the inconvenient truths that all of your pro-life articles have avoided! And tell me your plan for tax increases to institutionalize all of the crack and other drug babies, horribly deformed babies, increase orphanage system staffing and size, increase adoption agency size, revamp adoption laws to be easier (which is why people go to China to adopt babies, they can get them in less than two days). What is your plan for this and the tax increases you would shoulder for all of this? I am ready to agree, please tell me your plan!!
I am independent/unaffiliated Tom whom you have not answered, and I want to hear all of your solutions and I am ready to agree. Let me hear from you Pro-Life Larry!
There is no one who calls themselves pro abortion Larry.
But you did get beat by Spanky The Clown.
I understand why no one who is pro-abortion wants to claim the procedure … but that does not change the fact that they support women having abortions … approve if the practice … do not want it ended or limited …. ego PRO abortion. As are you. Hiding behind a euphemism does not change the facts. It is a petty point, but you are in favor of abortion on demand and I am opposed. Pro-choice = pro-abortion.
Larry, your response, ” I am not obsessed with bickering and responding to sarcasm, insults, snide remarks and every bit of disinformation that pops up here. You use the wrong word when you opine that I am “incapable” of responding — or “inflexible.” The word you are looking for is “unwilling.” ”
You may be unwilling. But you also have no answers like most GOP on the topics asked you to respond to! You are a clanging empty symbol, and nothing more. Again, rather than answer common sense questions where I am willing to listen to your recommendations, no, you decide to demean. You have nothing in your quiver on this topic buddy! Time you admit it!!
Listen to the comments on “Face the Nation” aired 4/30 by the republican lady senator from SC advocating for what I have discussed in this and other blogs. It is you that is very out of touch on this issue. And as usual, you attempt to insult others and bully because your quiver is empty! And we know it!!
Larry, As I said above, I am far more concerned with the life of the Mother. I also said that it was impossible to write a law that covered all situations in an issue as complex as abortion. I said that I felt that it was best for the decision to be left up to the people most intimately involved in the situation-the woman and her doctor, who I believe are most qualified to make the appropriate decision, rather than a group of lawmakers. I believe that in some instances the opinions of the father need to be taken into account, normally if the woman is married. If the woman has been raped, or her life is in danger, then the decision should rest solely with the woman and her doctor. I am not an advocate of abortion as you state above, I am merely pro-life, but my pro-life stance is for the people who are born, not the unborn fetuses. You have refuted none of my arguments, mainly because a logical person would only see them as valid. The other thing that you missed is the majority of the country agrees with me, and not you…. So there tis….
Mikef … You want to call your self pro-LIFE. But that is a misnomer. Life is the issue for 100 percent of the unborn who are to be aborted. The LIFE of the mother is at risk only in a very very small number of pregnancies — and the vast majority of pro-life folks believe in that exception.. You are pro-abortion based on the arbitrary desire of the mother … convenience … economic issues. It has nothing to do with protection of life. Nada. The appropriate term for you is pro-abortion — or pro-choice is you prefer to hide behind the euphemism. There are not arguments from you to refute. You favor the destroying of developing human beings. That is a fact. I cannot refute that — nor can you. Despite you self-serving claim … no a logic person would not necessarily see things your way. My entire position is based on fact and logic — that the fetus IS a developing human being deserving of the rights of personhood. You see the same developing human being as disposable waste. That is also a fact. I say that in the belief that IF you were to have my opinion of personhood in the womb, you pro-abortion advocacy is hideous — akin to human sacrifice … Nazi experiments … and the Tuskegee syphilis studies. So, what is it in the womb — trash or person?
ANSWER MY QUESTIONS LARRY! IT is people like you who stop the discussion and reasonable results. I asked you for your recommendations and proposed solutions, and again, you duck the conversation. YOU ARE AN EMPTY QUIVER!
Tom … And now you DEMAND that I respond to you? Who in hell do you think you are? Because I have no time or desire to engage in endless debate, you arrogantly and incorrectly assume — or allege — that I have no answers. And based on your assumption, you insult me. If you think your childish insult will provoke me into prolonged counterpoints, you are mistaken. I can well give you the responses for which you beg, buy I CHOOSE not to do so. To be perfectly Frank (no pun intended), you are not worth my time. Get it?
Larry, As per usual, you missed the main subject of my comments. Abortion is too complex for legislators to write laws to control. Women are being forced to carry their rapists child. Women are at risk of dying due to doctors reluctant to provide appropriate care in red states where abortion is being severely restricted. Conservative pundits have turned abortion into a major issue that idiots pick up and think that we have a major problem with abortions. There was no problem-doctors were not aborting viable babies. The decision regarding a woman’s health should be made by a doctor and the woman involved-not big government
Mikef … I am not sure if you accidentally misstated or do not know the facts. You wrote “There was no problem-doctors were not aborting viable babies.” The vast, vast, vast majority of abortions are performed on healthy and viable fetuses — developing human beings in which both the unborn and the mother would survive and be healthy.. And you keep talking about rape, incest and the actual life of the mother — all of which are exceptions supported by the vast majority of pro-lifers. Another exception is the survivability of the fetus. Except when it involved late term abortions. Managing all this legislatively is not easy. It is a complex issue. But I think by abandoning Roe v Wade, we have the opportunity through the legislatures and the courts to arrive at a proper balance on the question of abortion. I suggest that will be banning late-term abortions and providing reasonable limits on all abortions. Pro-lifers are not against abortions in all cases … but we oppose the vast majority of them they are carried out solely for the convenience of the woman without regard to the interests of the father and the unborn.
+1 Larry ; altough the emotional outburst not needed. Nothing or no ty suffice
Tom, you can ask, you can prod a bit, but demand? That’s not you.
Brsides, u know the answer ;-(
Larry, Just exactly how many pregnant women who die because they cannot get the medical care they need due to abortion restrictions do you find ‘acceptable’? How many pregnant women must carry their rapists child because they cannot receive an abortion? My answer is zero-which is why I am pro-life, pro-life of people living and breathing already on earth. You are anti-abortion, plain and simple. Laws cannot (and are not) written to take all the nuances of abortion into consideration. I willingly admit that I am willing to accept the few cases where a doctors error allows a viable unborn child to be aborted to prevent medical emergency and potentially death to an expectant mother. That is not pro-abortion-that is pro-life for the living..
How many families ruined as it tears them apart.
The lawsuit in TX since she will never have kids because Larry is pro life she loses her future and progeny.
Yeah, it’s a trade-off all right. And I don’t like it.
I am PRO CHOICE
Oh no, say it ain’t so Tom. NC just went to 12 weeks….
The entire South is abortion ban land!
Oh well, now the drivers for the South’s gun running iron pipeline will be women…..greater efficiencies have been achieved! win-win.
Never thought I’d see this in my lifetime.
Next the South will bring Bundling back!