Advanced search

What on earth is going on in America??

(871 Posts)
Nanny0gg Wed 15-May-19 10:27:27

How can a supposedly 'civilised' society pass such a retrograde law?

And other states following suit?

Codecracker112 Sun 30-Jun-19 13:11:09


@agnurse How can you justify this?

Lweji Mon 03-Jun-19 09:21:56

pro-lifers are NOT about controlling women. Why would you think that?

Because most also tend to be pro-death (penalty) and pro-guns. At least in the same US states that have pretty much made abortion illegal.
And they're not keen on supporting people on low incomes or adequate health care for all.
It seems that life is only valued just as long as a woman needs to carry it.

Songsofexperience Mon 03-Jun-19 07:34:59

Agree with this resister.
My initial point was about contraception: I've not come across pro lifers who also support contraception. They might exist but mostly they don't. It's not logical though: a problem is best addressed at source, is it not? Yet they're not the kind of people to encourage research into the male pill for instance. Doesn't that say it all about their views on gender equality?

resisterpersister Mon 03-Jun-19 00:55:43

pro-lifers are NOT about controlling women. Why would you think that?

If pro-lifers are not about controlling women, then why didn't the Alabama bill make and exceptions for fetuses conceived via rape and incest. But disposing of fetuses created in a lab is fine?

They even said, when asked, that it was because the fetus in the lab wasn't in a woman's body.

What clearer indication can you have? This is not about the sanctity of life, or any such nonsense, while men creating and destroying fetuses for profit, in a lab is seen as fine, but 12 year old girls aborting a fetus conceived through rape by an older family member is not allowed.

arganlady Sun 02-Jun-19 23:23:04

I'm so annoyed the vile pro lifers have found Mumsnet. Twisted people.

arganlady Sun 02-Jun-19 23:22:14

@Gth1234 fuck off troll.

Gth1234 Sun 02-Jun-19 23:14:52


pro-lifers are NOT about controlling women. Why would you think that?
A few will be. But then I'm sure you will equally admit that some women treat abortion as birth control.

Turgid Sun 02-Jun-19 21:11:03

Good to see companies taking a stand against this but I wish they'd do the same in Northern Ireland.

DoomOnTheBroom Sat 18-May-19 20:52:28

Rather astoundingly, a quick browse of Twitter will reveal a lot of men who flat out don't believe that child bearing can be fatal. It's all feminist man hating propaganda.

Let's be 100% honest here, if men were able to get pregnant then you can bet your backside that mifepristone and misoprostol would be available over the counter without a prescription.

placemats Sat 18-May-19 19:47:54

Of course the caveat to all of this is that abortion is allowed if the mother's life is in danger.

Now, think about that. Abortion is allowed.

placemats Sat 18-May-19 19:46:12

And spare me the argument that the child is innocent. No woman on this planet has given birth to a child. Women give birth to babies.

However, pregnancy due to incest? Obviously that 12 year old was asking for it from her brothers or father. Incest is also rape.

Pregnancy from rape? Obviously that girl/woman was asking for it.

placemats Sat 18-May-19 19:41:18

They have no compunction about condemning a 16 year old to Death Row.

placemats Sat 18-May-19 19:37:19

It's quite plain and obvious that those who wish to stop abortion because they wish to 'save life' are also in favour of the death penalty.


Songsofexperience Sat 18-May-19 17:44:00

Pro-lifers are mostly about controlling women; the 'sacred life' element is in fact mostly a pretext. Proof of that is their position on contraception. If they were truly just concerned about preserving life, they'd support research into 100% fool-proof, side-effect free contraception for men and women but they don't. They're backwards, archaic authoritarians.

mollysshadow Sat 18-May-19 17:21:19

The #auntienetwork is starting to trend. Women in other states offering help to those who need abortions.

isabellerossignol Sat 18-May-19 17:19:13

I mean, I accept that a lot of people posting that sort of crap are just baiting and trolling but alongside that there do appear to be people who believe it. And of course then there are the women who have had multiple pregnancies and enjoyed them, so any woman who says she found pregnancy awful is just a moaner who needs to suck it up.

isabellerossignol Sat 18-May-19 17:16:11

Rather astoundingly, a quick browse of Twitter will reveal a lot of men who flat out don't believe that child bearing can be fatal. It's all feminist man hating propaganda. Women's bodies are designed for birth and we just exaggerate how frightening it is in order to try to make the poor men feel guilty. And even a ten year old can do it because if she has started menstruating then she's ready.

failingatlife Sat 18-May-19 17:09:16

Bunsygirl I too had HELLP DS1 was delivered by emcs at 35 weeks due to foetal distress. Second pregnancy was twins so very stressed about the same thing happening again. No way would I have risked my life and leave my 2 Yr old motherless to appease the anti choice lobby.

texasgurl Sat 18-May-19 14:54:08

Yes, nancy75, these laws get delayed until a final decision is made.

TheGoalIsToStayOutOfTheHole Sat 18-May-19 11:35:18

They think that life begins at conception and terminating that life is absolutely no different than infanticide. That's why there's no exception for rape and incest.

This view makes much more sense to me than those who claim abortion is murder being alright for rape and such. Its a disgusting view IMO makes more sense than the 'abortion is murder but we allow it for X' crowd.

DiWoo Sat 18-May-19 10:29:50

Less than 30% of children in the U.S. foster system are available for adoption.

While that may indeed mean there are more people looking to adopt than children available for adoption, for me, that is more reason not to force people to have unwanted children saying that they can put them up for adoption, because there are far more children, therefore left in the care system, which, by my understanding, is not generally the best life (not that I’m saying if you can’t live your best life, you’re better being dead). Another example, to me, that they don’t have the child’s best interest at heart.

All this has got me thinking more about it all, for example, if they do, at a later stage (presuming it all goes through to the higher courts, in attempt to overturn the constitutional laws etc etc which I’ve read is their plan, sorry if I’m not using the right terminology but hopefully you know what I mean) add then exemptions for rape and incest, what would their criteria be for rape? I’m sure that they wouldn’t just accept the woman's word for it, would the man have to be convicted of it first, I wonder, which could then mean that it is too late

Acis Sat 18-May-19 09:44:14

Purely to avoid having agnurse coming back to make a fuss, she did actually say somewhere upthread that she does not maintain that adults should only ever have sex for procreation purposes - indeed, her favoured contraception method involves abstaining from sex during fertile periods, which must mean that you can have as much sex as you want at supposedly non-fertile times. And I think somewhere she accepted that people who are infertile or post menopause can be free to have sex whenever they want.

TheViceOfReason Sat 18-May-19 09:30:40

Interesting @agnurse didn’t answer me last time I asked...

But again: I assume you believe that adults should only ever have vaginal intercourses for the specific reason of conceiving a child?

As NO type of birth control is 100% effective, therefore if you don’t want to be pregnant, you don’t have V.I.

Correct I assume?

I assume that all the senators and average American men supporting this nonsense also only have V.I. With their wives / partners solely to conceive?

pallisers Sat 18-May-19 00:51:47

here did you hear that the president is “trying to pass it so that employers don’t have to include birth control”? Never heard anything so ridiculous.

It is not that ridiculous (apart from the passing legislation thing).
Employers can already decide not to include birth control on the basis of the Hobby Lobby decision. A republican-held congress could well extend the hobby lobby decision beyond closely-held for profit organisations.

States can only enact laws that comply with the US constitution. As of now, the US constitution (through Roe v Wade) guarantees the right to abortion. so states cannot outlaw it. What they can do is pass legislation that will be immediately stayed and overturned by state courts, then successive federal courts until they finally find their way to the Supreme court in the hope that that court as now constituted will ignore stare decisis and overturn it.

I can't see the Roberts court doing that in any significant way. What bothers me more is the visceral hatred of and distrust of women that is shown by these pieces of legislation. Where will that end? In one state a female lawmaker tried to make an amendment that would give health care coverage for pregnancy and birth to any woman denied an abortion - it was rejected. culturally and ideologically Alabama is very far from Massachusetts where I live but this is an all-out assault on women's rights and an unmasking of a deep hatred of women. Many of these new pieces of (unconsitutional) legislation put restrictions in place that are worse than those that existed pre Roe-v-Wade.

nancy75 Sat 18-May-19 00:10:17

texasgurl while the laws are being decided at a higher level/in court do they still apply or do they have to wait until the legal stuff is finished before applying the new laws?

Join the discussion

Registering is free, quick, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Get started »