Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

What on earth is going on in America??

878 replies

Nanny0gg · 15/05/2019 10:27

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-48275795

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

And other states following suit?

OP posts:
TemporaryPermanent · 15/05/2019 20:15

'whether by breast or bottle'

Well, yes, I can't be forced to use my body to breast feed, as you state - it's legal to feed a baby by other means. And in fact the night ds was born at one point he was bottle fed by a midwife and nobody legally required me to feed him. Not feeding a baby is neglect, but using my body without my choice remains wrong! Hooray!

Abby Johnson, as many articles attest, is now an anti choice Catholic, habing grown up an anti choice Baptist, which is fine. She also lies an enormous amount, particularly about her time working in a healthcare centre ('abortion industry' my arse). Her fictional account is now the basis of a film which I am going to exercise my choice not to watch.

Quintella · 15/05/2019 20:15

Still peddling the "what if you had to choose between two children" bollocks?

Yup.

SaskiaRembrandt · 15/05/2019 20:15

Actually I am not lying about being a nurse. I have a Bachelor of Nursing with distinction and a Master's of Nursing. Both are from accredited universities

Yeah, sure you do. I suspect these 'accredited universities' are similar to the one Dr. Ian Paisley got his doctorate from, because frankly, you knowledge of biology, your ethics and your simplistic attitude would rule you out of any genuine, respected university.

DoomOnTheBroom · 15/05/2019 20:16

Let me give you a scenario. You have two children. You have enough food to feed yourself and one of the children, or both children. It is not an option for you to let Social Services take your children. Do you have the right to deliberately starve one of your children to death so that you and the other one can survive? After all, wouldn't your children be miserable if they had no mum?

That is nothing at all like abortion.

A better example:

Jane is pregnant. Jane doesn't want to be pregnant for reasons that are nobodies business but her own. Jane lives in a country where she has access to safe, legal abortion so she makes an appointment with her GP and arranges to end the pregnancy.

AngeloMysterioso · 15/05/2019 20:17

Did you know that the judges who passed Roe vs. Wade were men?

So fucking what?

Did you also know that "Jane Roe" from Roe v. Wade never actually had an abortion, and that in her later years, she was adamantly against abortion?

Again, so fucking what??

So if they really didn't want to get pregnant why were they having sex?

Because it’s a lot of fun and it feels bloody great Grin

Alabama of course supports a stress on abstinence.

The way things are going, that’ll be the only option left to women with child-bearing potential.

SaskiaRembrandt · 15/05/2019 20:18

agnurse a right to food is not the same as a right to utilise another person's body. Babies do not have a legal right to be breastfed.

Please answer the question I asked, stop prevaricating and using false analogies and answer the question I actually asked.

Even if you believe that life begins at conception, how can you justify a foetus being given rights that massively exceed those of humans who have been born? As I keep saying, no 'born' person has the right to legally compel another to give up their bodily autonomy in order to sustain or save a life. Why are foetuses different to people who need blood transfusions, or kidney transplants? In fact, to compare what you may consider like with like: why are foetuses different to newborn babies who require blood transfusions or organ transplants? Why does that right end the moment someone is born?

Inniu · 15/05/2019 20:20

So in some states an embryo the size of a lentil will have the right to use an unwilling woman’s body as an incubator but a sock person doesn’t have the right to healthcare.

bliminy · 15/05/2019 20:20

I'm trying to get my head around the fact that:

  • carrying a baby in your body for 9 months, then expelling it in a fashion that is generally enormously painful and quite risky, is not classed as 'extraordinary care'.
  • carrying a baby in your body for 9 months, then expelling it in a fashion that is generally enormously painful and quite risky, is being compared to having to bottle feed a baby or stop your car to help someone.
agnurse · 15/05/2019 20:21

People have a right to ordinary care. There is no right to extraordinary care. Leaving an unborn baby unmolested is ordinary care.

Spinnaret · 15/05/2019 20:21

Actually it IS a legal right. The Universal Declaration on the Rights of the Child states that children's rights include the right to food, for example. A newborn can't feed itself.

That just says that children have to be fed. Not that they have to get it from feeding off another human body.

agnurse · 15/05/2019 20:23

I see a lot of talk here about MY rights.

What about responsibilities?

Please tell me, who ever died from abstinence? Why is it not a reasonable option? Are you so unable to control yourself that you need abortion?

Keep in mind that sex, too, is not a right. If it is a right, someone has an obligation to have sex with you.

agnurse · 15/05/2019 20:24

As a matter of fact, I received my nursing degree from an accredited university and wrote and passed the national licensing exam.

In order for a student to be eligible to write the exam, their program has to be recognized and accredited.

Dottierichardson · 15/05/2019 20:26

Do you have the right to deliberately starve one of your children to death so that you and the other one can survive? After all, wouldn't your children be miserable if they had no mum?

Firstly I would say it’s a very bizarre, extremely contrived example. Secondly I would say whatever the outcome of such a scenario the society at large who did not provide for starving children were to blame – it’s also insulting to the many mothers actually going without food in this country to feed their children because of cuts to benefits and support; and insulting to the memories of those in history who in actual extreme scenarios the Jewish ghettoes in Poland during WW2, for example or those who were victims of the Ukranian famine in 1933 who were forced to make these kinds of choices, families were known to have eaten their children because they were starving; those who caused them to starve in this case the Stalinist regime were to blame not those forced into cannibalism – thirdly I would say that in a society in which there were literally no safety nets, the more people forced to have children they either didn’t’ want or couldn’t provide for, the more children there would be in danger of starving. So decent contraception and abortion would be extremely important.

SaskiaRembrandt · 15/05/2019 20:27

agnurse People have a right to ordinary care. There is no right to extraordinary care. Leaving an unborn baby unmolested is ordinary care

So you're saying that the need to utilise another person's body to sustain life is extraordinary care? But an 'unborn baby' needs to utilise another person's body to sustain life, therefore that is extraordinary care which you argue no one has a right to.

Ginger1982 · 15/05/2019 20:29

Ok, why don't we pass a law that after, say, fathering 2 kids, all men have to have a vasectomy? I can't see many men voting for that.

And are you American @agnurse?

agnurse · 15/05/2019 20:29

What is the purpose of an abortion? It is the death of the unborn baby. That's the whole intent.

If you don't want to be pregnant, all you have to do is wait 9 months. But of course you don't want to do that.

Is it the pregnancy you don't want, or is it the baby resulting from the pregnancy that you don't want? An abortion is no picnic and is not necessarily safer than childbirth.

If a person who is in kidney failure or needs a blood transfusion is made comfortable, they will die. But that's not the intent.

Quintella · 15/05/2019 20:29

Sex is fun and abstinence isn't.

American states that concentrate on teaching school kids about abstinence rather than proper sex ed have the highest incidences of STDs.

Humans will always want to fuck.

SaskiaRembrandt · 15/05/2019 20:30

Please tell me, who ever died from abstinence? Why is it not a reasonable option? Are you so unable to control yourself that you need abortion?

I'm not interested in indulging in some weird sexual form of anorexia. If that floats your boat, knock yourself out, but don't inflict your neurosis on other people.

And FYI, I've never had an abortion, and I'm now in my 50s so it's not really an issue, is it?

bliminy · 15/05/2019 20:30

One thing this thread really is bringing home to me is how weak the arguments held by anti-abortionists really are.

Thank you for that agnurse. If anything you've made me more pro-choice.

InionEile · 15/05/2019 20:31

Still waiting to hear about your adopted children, your work in foster care, your fundraising for low-income families, donation of those accredited Masters level nursing skills for free to uninsured families, agnurse....

You must be so busy! Living your truth as someone with deeply held passionate views on the sanctity of human life right from the point of conception must take a lot of time and energy. How do you even get the time to post on the internet with all those adopted children you have and the donated time spent in children’s hospitals and food banks??

TooStressyTooMessy · 15/05/2019 20:33

This is absolutely bloody terrifying. Apart from the impact on women which I can scarcely believe, as PP have said, what on Earth is going to happen to obstetrics and gynaecology? Who in their right mind is going to go into that speciality Sad?

bliminy · 15/05/2019 20:33

If you don't want to be pregnant, all you have to do is wait 9 months.

There it is in a nutshell - the complete disdain for the woman/incubator.

agnurse · 15/05/2019 20:33

I live in Canada. Essential health care is government-funded.

I have volunteered in a crisis pregnancy center that offers women support for deciding to keep their children. I have also donated to an eleventh-hour organization that helps women who decide at the last minute that they can't go through with an abortion.

Are you against sex trafficking? How much time and money do you invest supporting victims of sex trafficking? Do you take them into your home? Do you help them to learn skills so they aren't forced into the sex trade?

sheettent · 15/05/2019 20:35

I honestly don't know how some of you are staying so calm. I'm leaving this thread because I only have sweary things to say to a certain (very fucking deluded and unpleasant) person.

JQBased · 15/05/2019 20:36

How about we take precautions to not get pregnant in the first place? I can understand abortions and the legit reasons, but having known women who have had several abortions each for the reason of they simply don't want children and I do think perhaps prevention and greater responsibility should also be promoted. This is stupid and counterproductive to go back on abortion laws, but there needs to be a middle ground and not just I'm going to have a quick abortion in my lunch hour, please just cover my phone until I get back...which has happened...

Swipe left for the next trending thread