AIBU to ask how much support Pro-Life believers provide for actual children in need? Texas just banned abortion in the US.

[thecranberries]

AIBU to ask what Pro Life 'supporters' do to actually help living children in need? Sparked by Rachel Maddow Show Podcast on MSNBC - which gives a brilliant coverage on what's going on.

PL seems to want to stop a woman's right to choose, even in instances of rape or incest. That's in Texas, US, but as we know, many of the 'trends' that start in the US migrate over here. And as we know, there are lots of Pro-Life (read anti abortion, anti women) believers over here.

So, my AIBU is to ask - what do these PL do to actually support actual living children in need in this country or the world? How much do they give to UNICEF/Save the Children etc charities? How much do they donate time, money and resources to actual children living in poverty, bad housing, experiencing harm or bad schooling to ensure that these actual living children get the best life possible?

Do these PL, who cite religious grounds, actually enable women to obtain proper contraception when they need it? And speaking about religion, how many religious PL turn a blind eye to religious organisations history of child abuse?

I don't understand anyone, especially men, who does not accept a woman's right to chose what happens to her own body.

So, AIBU to ask Pro Life supporters to tell me in detail what they do - as actively as supporting their 'cause' - when it comes to helping living children in need?

@Petardos

I am not against abortion but it should not replaced birth control. There are so many ways to prevent pregnancy and even after having sex you have the morning after pill. If you are rape is different as it is horrible but I why people have an abortion at 24 weeks?

The theory that it replaces birth control (because feckless, lazy women can't be bothered with birth control) is one of the many ridiculous fallacies anti-abortion people like to trot out. And, in a similar vein to OP's original question regarding whether anti abortion people are ALSO going to lobby for real change and support for these babies when they're born, I'd love to see anti abortion campaigners add making contraception easier and cheaper to access to their efforts.

As for having abortions at 24 weeks, it's pretty uncommon and almost exclusively as a result of the foetus or the mother's health.

The number of abortions that occur after 20 weeks is vanishingly small and almost entirely due to life-threatening defects found during the 20 week scan.

It should only be allowed after 20 weeks if it is life threatening.

Blimey, I'd missed @HarrietsChariot 's post somehow.

So a teenage rape victim should be sterilised if she seeks an abortion? Denied the chance of a normal life and future motherhood?

That's arguably worse than the position of the Texan pro-lifers! Absolutely fucking unbelievable.

HarrietsChariot

WTF?

@HarrietsChariot
People like you ALWAYS put the "blame" of pregnancy on the woman don't you???

Why do people like you never say things like "if a woman wants an abortion, then the man who got her pregnant has to have a vasectomy, so he doesn't put other women in the same predicament?"

The idea of forcing sterilisation on a human is just vile.

@Mrgrinch

Those of you who are apparently so keen to hear my opinion on things, feel free to PM me and I'll gladly say it.

This is a parenting website where I know people come for advice on abortions and I'm not going to purposely say something on here that I know would upset them, it's not the place.

And I'd like to ask what you as a PL do to actually support living children who are in need, at home or abroad and how much time and energy you devote to supporting actual living children in actual need?

If you can proudly state your position, then proudly show off all the things you do to support living children in need.

This would make people think very hard about whether an abortion is right for them, knowing that they will then no longer to be able to have children in the future.

Because women have abortions for shits and giggles?

I would have preferred to name change for this but dont know how to do it. So here goes anyway.
I am anti abortion because I feel that it has come to a free for all.allowing abortion for any and every reason. That was not the intended plan when abortion was originally legalised when it was supposed to be for extreme circumstances like conception through rape or risk of life to the mother. Now it is allowed for any and every reason and the time limits are constantly being tested to allow it at later stages when pregnancies are viable. So that is my opinion and I dont apologise for it. Nor do I judge people who have had an abortion . That is not my place.
But now to answer the ops question. What do I do personally to help children in need. Well as I say I would no doubt be accused of virtue signalling but I do the following . I donate to several charities supporting children and poor families both home and abroad . I volunteer my time when I can to charities and organisations that support people esp families and most crucially I have taken on 2 disabled children with extremely complex needs. One is adopted and the other is a long term foster child.

I am passionate about children with disabilities being able to live a good life and reach their full potential and find it v sad that babies are being aborted with issues like downs syndrome and cleft palate.
So yes there are those of us who are prepared to put our money where our mouth is and I am by no means alone.

@HarrietsChariot

Are you American by any chance?

The theory that it replaces birth control (because feckless, lazy women can't be bothered with birth control) is one of the many ridiculous fallacies anti-abortion people like to trot out.

I am not anti abortion but I can see there is not room for discussion here. However, Yes, there are women that do not use contraception and get pregnant and then want an abortion and pay by the taxpayer. You can’t proof there are none. However, whatever fits with your agenda.

That was not the intended plan when abortion was originally legalised when it was supposed to be for extreme circumstances like conception through rape or risk of life to the mother.

Source? Is this in the legislation anywhere? Or is that something that has been imposed by interpretation?

Smokey devil. Are you always this judgmental or rude?

@flapjackfairy

I would have preferred to name change for this but dont know how to do it. So here goes anyway. I am anti abortion because I feel that it has come to a free for all.allowing abortion for any and every reason. That was not the intended plan when abortion was originally legalised when it was supposed to be for extreme circumstances like conception through rape or risk of life to the mother. Now it is allowed for any and every reason and the time limits are constantly being tested to allow it at later stages when pregnancies are viable. So that is my opinion and I dont apologise for it. Nor do I judge people who have had an abortion . That is not my place. But now to answer the ops question. What do I do personally to help children in need. Well as I say I would no doubt be accused of virtue signalling but I do the following . I donate to several charities supporting children and poor families both home and abroad . I volunteer my time when I can to charities and organisations that support people esp families and most crucially I have taken on 2 disabled children with extremely complex needs. One is adopted and the other is a long term foster child. I am passionate about children with disabilities being able to live a good life and reach their full potential and find it v sad that babies are being aborted with issues like downs syndrome and cleft palate. So yes there are those of us who are prepared to put our money where our mouth is and I am by no means alone.

That's great. Good to know what a PL does to support actual living children in need.

Leads me to the other issue, which is a tangent, but which is really interesting to me; why do you feel the need to impose your views onto other women? Why not be Pro-Choice rather than anti-abortion? For me the former captures a woman's right to chose what to do with her own body, and the latter imposed someone else's right upon a woman's body.

Do you see the difference?

Do you do this with all of your views on other matters - ie impose them upon everyone else, even if they are not connected to you?

@flapjackfairy

I would have preferred to name change for this but dont know how to do it. So here goes anyway. I am anti abortion because I feel that it has come to a free for all.allowing abortion for any and every reason. That was not the intended plan when abortion was originally legalised when it was supposed to be for extreme circumstances like conception through rape or risk of life to the mother. Now it is allowed for any and every reason and the time limits are constantly being tested to allow it at later stages when pregnancies are viable. So that is my opinion and I dont apologise for it. Nor do I judge people who have had an abortion . That is not my place. But now to answer the ops question. What do I do personally to help children in need. Well as I say I would no doubt be accused of virtue signalling but I do the following . I donate to several charities supporting children and poor families both home and abroad . I volunteer my time when I can to charities and organisations that support people esp families and most crucially I have taken on 2 disabled children with extremely complex needs. One is adopted and the other is a long term foster child. I am passionate about children with disabilities being able to live a good life and reach their full potential and find it v sad that babies are being aborted with issues like downs syndrome and cleft palate. So yes there are those of us who are prepared to put our money where our mouth is and I am by no means alone.

The only reason needed for an abortion is that the person who is pregnant doesn't want to continue with that pregnancy. Why should we need a reason other than that?

Why on earth would you want to force someone who feels they cannot cope with a baby to have a baby?

While I'm at it my daughter was born absolutely broken, she was in horrific pain every day for her 2 weeks of life with a condition that couldn't have been picked up with the usual tests.

I loved my daughter more than life itself, but I'm damned sure that had another pregnancy resulted in a child who was found to have her condition I 100% would have had an abortion, which would have been infinitely kinder to a child who was going to die anyway. If you think those late term decisions are easy you can think again.

@Petardos

Ban in Texas after 6 weeks of pregnancy. In Britain is up to 24 weeks which I find is murder tbh.

Well, it isnt. Is it? Not by the legal definition of life and the legal definition of murder.

@bananapumpkin

Anti abortion is not anti women. It's clear that many people are both, but many others are pro-life partly because abortion is such a damaging experience for many women.

While it's laudable to help children in need, it's irrelevant to the PL/PC argument - unless you seriously believe that it's better to be dead than living in poverty.

And you buy into the women damaged arguments. Silly little women and girls, who don’t know their own minds? Misogyny at its best.

Seeing as the vast vast majority of women don’t regret abortions, tell me what else you’re for, where a tiny minority benefit but the majority suffer. Lockdown forever? Banning cars? Legalising prostitution? Making all drug sales and consumption legal?

@Petardos

The theory that it replaces birth control (because feckless, lazy women can't be bothered with birth control) is one of the many ridiculous fallacies anti-abortion people like to trot out.

I am not anti abortion but I can see there is not room for discussion here. However, Yes, there are women that do not use contraception and get pregnant and then want an abortion and pay by the taxpayer. You can’t proof there are none. However, whatever fits with your agenda.

If money is your concern, I'd imagine a baby would cost the taxpayer a wee bit more than an abortion.

@Petardos

The number of abortions that occur after 20 weeks is vanishingly small and almost entirely due to life-threatening defects found during the 20 week scan.

It should only be allowed after 20 weeks if it is life threatening.

Good job it's not up to you then, eh?

That was not the intended plan when abortion was originally legalised when it was supposed to be for extreme circumstances like conception through rape or risk of life to the mother.

I would be interested in your source for this too please @flapjackfairy
The abortion act 1967 gives the following reasons for abortion being permitted

-risk to the life of the pregnant woman;
-a necessity for abortion to prevent grave permanent injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman;
-risk of injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman or any existing children of her family (up to a term limit of 24 weeks of gestation);
-substantial risk that if the child were born, it would "suffer from such physical or mental abnormalities as to be seriously handicapped".

@araiwa

I don't think it would ever spread to UK. We have nowhere near the number of religious lunatics they have in the USA.

I would imagine this thing in Texas now will get kicked out anyway

Northern Ireland? The Bible Belt of Europe. It’s already within the U.K.

@Petardos

The theory that it replaces birth control (because feckless, lazy women can't be bothered with birth control) is one of the many ridiculous fallacies anti-abortion people like to trot out.

I am not anti abortion but I can see there is not room for discussion here. However, Yes, there are women that do not use contraception and get pregnant and then want an abortion and pay by the taxpayer. You can’t proof there are none. However, whatever fits with your agenda.

If you, as a taxpayer, don't like the thought of money being spent on abortions, then you aren't going to like how much it's going to cost to pay for the maternity care, possible social housing, the free nursery hours, the fourteen years of compulsory education, any medical treatment that child may require, any benefits they might claim as adults.

Besides, how are you going to declare which women seeking abortions used contraception and who didn't? Are we playing eeny meeny miny mo to decide who's worthy of not being forced to give birth, or are there some sort of psychic powers you'd like to utilise?

“ If money is your concern, I'd imagine a baby would cost the taxpayer a wee bit more than an abortion.*

Contraception is free at the NHS and I am happy to pay taxes for it.

The people who have campaigned and introduced this in Texas are utter cunts. End of.

Fortunately, the human rights act will stop it in the U.K. - assuming that the current Gov don’t succeed in getting rid of it, which is a real risk.

I really hate the term, with the fire of a thousand suns so to speak. Pro-life suggests the opposite is pro-death. Nobody, is pro-death. It's either pro or anti choice, everything else is just semantics.

No they don't generally care, it's not about the other person, it's about their own views or beliefs and the thought that everyone should have the same principles.

@Petardos

“ If money is your concern, I'd imagine a baby would cost the taxpayer a wee bit more than an abortion.*

Contraception is free at the NHS and I am happy to pay taxes for it.

Yes but babies cost the NHS more than an abortion.

How do abortion providers determine which women used contraception?