Let It Rain Forever

brooklynmutt:

“Well this looks familiar: every lawmaker at the House hearing on the nationwide 20-week abortion ban is a man.” - @LEBassett

(via stfuconservatives)

notyrbabe:

some facts:

• childbirth is 14 times more deadly than legal abortion so do not try to use the argument that abortion is unsafe oh my god
• things that lower abortion rates: contraception, free childcare, affordable healthcare, education
• 87% of counties lack an abortion provider and 35% of women live in those counties
• in 2012 alone, 43 abortion restrictions were enacted in 19 states
• education increases employment rate which increases income which increases access to health care 
• federal medicaid funds cover abortion only in cases of rape, incest, and life endangerment 
• lacking insurance coverage, poor and low-income women often need considerable time to come up with the money to pay for an abortion
• one in five people who are pregnant will witness domestic violence in pregnancy
• pregnancy is a common tool used to keep people in abusive relationships
• abortion does not cause breast cancer. (here’s another source as well)
• people often feel relief and happiness after an abortion
• only 2% of the american population adopts
• in 2010 approximately 408,425 kids were in the US foster system
• there are 68,000 to 70,000 people who die of illegal abortions per year
• VERY VERY IMPORTANT: The inclusivity of trans* people is important and necessary in the abortion debate!!!!!!!

and to talk about morality:

• dont make martyrs out of aborted fetuses
• respect the right, reduce the need
• no matter what a person’s reasons for getting an abortion are it against a person’s bodily rights to force them to remain pregnant
• there’s no such thing as equal rights for the unborn considering if a pregnant person did not want to be pregnant with said unborn child, said unborn child would have to violate the rights of the pregnant person to stay and grow inside of that unwilling pregnant person’s body against that unwilling pregnant person’s wishes
• “the decision whether or not to bear a child is central to a woman’s life, to her well-being and dignity. when the government controls that decision for her, she is being treated as less than a full adult human responsible for her own choices.” - justice ruth bader ginsburg
• “Forcing a woman to wait three days and consult with some asshole trying to convince her not to abort will not change the fact that that woman does not want to have a child. Even if it changes her mind about terminating the pregnancy, it doesn’t change whatever circumstances brought her to an abortion clinic in the first place. She’ll still walk out just as devoid of choices, just as un- or underemployed, just as broke, just as in debt, just as uninsured, just as lacking daycare, just as unable to care for herself and/or her existing children, just as in need of medication that she can’t take while pregnant, just as enmeshed in an unhealthy or abusive relationship, just the same as she was when she walked in. She’ll just have been guilted into making sacrifices she doesn’t want to make, to honor someone else’s mistaken perceptions about her morality.”
• it confuses me as to how a fetus is supposed to have all these rights to grow and be born while a fully grown pregnant person’s bodily rights/ownership seemingly disappear with ejaculation 

(via stfuconservatives)

plannedparenthood:

Forty years ago, on January 22, 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its landmark decision in Roe v. Wade, legalizing abortion.

randomness-from-thisoldguy:

Matt Bors

(via soptastic)

presidentjonesco:

An important read. Go spend three minutes on it.

(via emyfersure)

flowersarebetterthanbullets on This Post (I made this a quote, because the original picture with text was visually offensive. These pro-life people need to take a graphic design class.)

(Source: plasticvines, via stfuconservatives)

fox-power:

NO ONE GETS LYNCHED FOR EXFOLIATING

(Source: lakilester, via stfuconservatives)

Crass, but yeah.

(Source: swagdaddymaster2015, via what-is-this-i-dont-even)

prolongedeyecontact:

An Indiana mother recently accompanied her daughter and her daughter’s boyfriend to one of Indiana’s Planned Parenthood clinics, but they unwittingly walked into a so-called “crisis pregnancy center” run by an anti-abortion group, one that shared a parking lot with the real Planned Parenthood clinic and was designed expressly to lure Planned Parenthood patients and deceive them.

The group took down the girl’s confidential personal information and told her to come back for her appointment, which they said would be in their “other office” (the real Planned Parenthood office nearby). When she arrived for her appointment, not only did the Planned Parenthood staff have no record of her, but the police were there. The “crisis pregnancy center” had called them, claiming that a minor was being forced to have an abortion against her will.

The “crisis pregnancy center” staff then proceeded to wage a campaign of intimidation and harassment over the following days, showing up at the girl’s home and calling her father’s workplace. Planned Parenthood’s clinic director reports that the girl was “scared to death to leave her house.” They even went to her school and urged classmates to pressure her not to have an abortion.

The anti-choice movement is setting up these “crisis pregnancy centers” across the country. Some of them have neutral-sounding names and run ads that falsely promise the full range of reproductive health services, but they dispense anti-choice propaganda and intimidation instead. And according to a recent article in The New York Times, there are currently more of these centers in the U.S. than there are actual abortion providers. What’s more, these centers have received $60 million in government grants. They’re being funded by our tax dollars.

http://www.ppaction.org/ 
Planned Parenthood Action Fund, 24 April 2006

[Emphasis mine. Hear that folks? We are funding terrorists with our tax dollars. The fact that this is legal is absolutely mind-blowing. And when we dare complain, they cry about how they’re being persecuted and censored unfairly, and we’re infringing on their freedom of speech. No, just no. This should not be fucking allowed.]

ETA: Some people in the notes were wondering about the veracity of this story so I found the original source (the citation above was all that was given at the website I got this from). Here’s some more quotes from the original story:

We [Planned Parenthood] have obtained permission to share some of the remarks the patient and her family wrote soon after their encounter with the CPC.

“I have been getting phone calls [from the CPC volunteer] at home and on my cell phone, and they came to my work… saying ‘we will come get you and throw you in a car and take you to a place that is safe.’  I made my decision [to have an abortion].  Even though I had talked to [the CPC person] before, she has no right to be giving out information about me [and my family].  They need to quit harassing me and my family and loved ones.  They have come to my home banging on my door and non-stop calling me.  I have heard racial comments about my boyfriend [and me].  They keep yelling my name, my mother’s, and my boyfriend’s.  They have no right giving out my information, and they need to respect my and my boyfriend’s decision. … They are trying to trap me but this is my decision and no person has forced me and I would like them to stop harassing me, my family, my boyfriend, and my work.”

Her mother added:

“These people have given [our personal contact] information to someone at [my daughter’s] school.  Now it seems even the students know certain things and are giving my daughter and her boyfriend a hard time as well.  Also, the faculty has heard things, too.  These people [the CPC personnel] have been standing outside Planned Parenthood yelling obscenities at all who enter.  My daughter’s, her boyfriend’s, and my name have been yelled out for all to hear.”

ETA #2: You might also be interested in this post I did awhile ago on more recent investigations of CPCs and their deceptive tactics.

I am so fucking angry. I am not a violent person, but what they’re doing, this is violence. Pure hateful violence, against a young girl who only wanted help. It is sickening that people like this are even allowed to exist. Let alone that it is legal for them to perform actions like this, and with public money. I am positively disgusted. I have never wanted so many people to fucking choke on their own shit and die. I cannot fathom why this is legal. It is deception and lies and mental abuse. To call a girls school? Her fathers work place? She has fucking rights, you animals. I would absolutely love to punch every single one of these people in the fucking face. And their parents, who obviously did a shit job of raising them.

(via soptastic)

stfuconservatives:

propaganda-for-life:

[Image: photoset of a Herman Cain quote on two panels: 
When Margaret Sanger—check my history—started Planned Parenthood, the objective was to put these centers in primarily black communities so they could help kill black babies before they came into the world. You don’t see that talked that much about. It’s Planned Parenthood. No, it’s planned genocide. And you can quote me on that.” End description.] 

anticapitalist:

nuderevolution:

socialistictendencies:

muchtoocynical:

miaman:

No, really, listen to the clip. He actually said this.

When confronted about this statement on Face the Nation, he again stated that Planned Parenthood is targeting black communities to commit genocide on unborn children. The full clip can be seen here. 

Herman Cain is currently the frontrunner in the republican presidential race.

wat

This guy might be crazier than Ron Paul. xD

I seriously fucking can’t. First off, no. There’s much historical debate over whether Sanger was a racist or not. But Planned Parenthood is not, nor has it ever been, a center for eugenics. It was founded as a place for women (it’s mostly women and other people with uteruses) to get the sexual health care they need. That’s what it is to this day. Only 1% of what Planned Parenthood does is abortions, and in fact, they provide so much contraception that they prevent more abortions than they provide annually to the tune of 800,000 fewer abortions per year in the United States.

Further, abortion clinics of any kind targeting primarily black neighborhoods is a total myth. About 6 in 10 are in primarily white neighborhoods, whereas fewer than 1 in 10 are in primarily black ones (Source, PDF).

#Herman Cain #doesn’t know shit about planned parenthood

(via stfuconservatives)

(Source: stfuconservatives, via phrenics)

esmeweatherwax:

tehsunshine:

nathanisamazing:

inherhipstheresrevolutions:

nathanisamazing:

depressingfacts:

You’re not pro-life, you’re just pro-70,000-deaths-a-year-from-unsafe-abortions.

You’re just pro-stripping-people-of-their-bodily-autonomy.

You’re just pro-flood-the-system-with-kids-who-won’t-get-adopted-and-who-we-can’t-afford-to-feed-or-provide-shelter-for.

You’re just pro-fuck-you-anybody-with-a-uterus.

You’re just a fucking asshole is what I’m trying to say really.

Unfortunate that abortion is killing a human.

Moral consequences on your head be.

Abortion doesn’t kill A human. It kills human cells forming to create a potential human being.

You’re A human until you are a human being i.e born, autonomously living and completely separate from someone elses body - a fetus is living inside someone’s womb, they are not separate.

Hi.

I study Biology at the University of Melbourne.

There is no way to morally or legally rationalise the point at which something becomes an organism. It’s pretty black-and-white.

The instant a the two haploid gametes of a diploid organism fuse together, you have a new diploid organism.

Ergo, you are killing a member of Homo sapiens.

You just have to justify killing (or murdering, depending on your point of view) a human that isn’t yet fully formed, cognitional or sentient.

Also, since you’re not even one of my followers, you should really just stop being argumentative and piss off.

Regards,

Nathan.

Hey, Nathan

I really love completing patterns, so as long as we’re sharing credentials that don’t really matter in the discussion of reproductive rights, I’d like to share that I am a Chemistry, Biochemistry, and Biology triple major with a concentration in Genetics at Ball State University. (It’s cool, you can laugh at my school name. I won’t get mad).

I’m four credits away from my chemistry degrees (second semester physical chemistry), and six credits away from my biology degree (botany and methods of ecology), so I’m pretty qualified to speak about issues of genetics, biochemistry, molecular biology, and eukaryotic development. But I’m actually not going to get too deep into the subjects I know extremely well because it’s just not necessary at this point.

First off, you said “The instant a the two haploid gametes of a diploid organism fuse together, you have a new diploid organism.” This technically is not true. There are a myriad of steps that take place during fertilization, and most of them occur after the sperm has attached to the oocyte. First and foremost, the oocyte must undergo meiosis II. At the “moment of conception,” as anti-choicers love to wax poetic about, the oocyte has 46 chromosomes and is entirely incapable of developing into the progeny.

While the oocyte busies itself with its second meiotic division, the sperm’s cellular body must degenerate. The tail, mitochondria, and most of its cellular components are digested, leaving only the sperm’s genomic DNA in a pronucleus. The pronuclei of both the ovum and sperm then undergo very rapid DNA replication (while still separate!) in order to prepare for mitosis as a zygote.

Eventually, the pronucleic membranes dissolve, allowing a mitotic spindle to develop. The spindle simultaneously combines maternal and paternal chromosomes while completing the first mitotic division of the new progeny. This is the first point at which the genomic DNA of both the male and female parent meet, and therefore this is the first point at which a progeny exists with an original complement of 46 chromosomes.

Anyway, that’s the only science I wanted to get into. My real point follows ahead.

Yes, the above zygote with 46 combined chromosomes is a member of Homo sapiens sapiens. To suggest otherwise would be silly- it’s certainly not Oxytricha or Stylonychia (primarily because both of those are far more complex than a human zygote). However, the argument at hand is whether or not that two-celled human is or is not a person with all of the rights and responsibilities of a developed and born human.

It is logically impossible to argue that two people with equal rights can occupy the same body. With two people (the zygote and the pregnant person, by your argument) sharing one body, the rights of both cannot be equally preserved. Either the pregnant person retains the right they ordinarily hold to make choices about their body or the zygote overrides that right.

So let’s talk about rights. A really touchy subject in medical ethics today is organ and tissue donation. Many laypeople think that donation compatibility, whether live or cadaver, is purely a function of ABO blood group. Unfortunately, this is not the case. There are multiple factors to compatibility, most of them genetically determined, and these factors are often so limiting that a person in need of a transplant is only compatible with one family member (if that).

Fortunately, some of our most commonly needed organs can be given by a live donor. More than half of all organ donations are given by live donors and include kidney, lung, skin, and liver tissues. These donations are almost always life-saving for the recipient.

So say your sister needs a kidney. She has been on dialysis for quite some time and her systems are failing. Without a new kidney, she will not survive the month. National databases have been scoured, your entire family and social circle has been tested, and you are the only compatible match. Are you morally obligated to give her your kidney? She will certainly die without it, but organ donation kind of sucks. I mean, it normally goes okay with minimal complications, but it’s painful and inconvenient and expensive and you will need to take time off work. Should there be a law dictating that you must give that kidney in order to save her life?

Most individuals I have spoken to say “no.” One went so far to say “giving her the kidney would be morally laudable but not morally imperative.” So let’s bring it back to abortion. 99.8% of abortions (and 100% of “elective” abortions) take place before 21 weeks gestation. The medical community has established that premature infants have virtually little chance of survival outside the uterus until approximately 24 weeks gestation, so all elective abortions are performed before fetal viability.

Embryos and fetuses prior to 24 weeks gestation cannot survive without using a pregnant person’s body as a host. An abortion serves to stop the donation of the host body to the progeny. Think about your answer to your sister’s kidney dilemma and answer: should a pregnant person be obligated to donate their body to a parasitic organism that will die without it?

At this point many anti-choicers respond with “well, she chose to have sex. You didn’t make your sister exist,” and this is completely true. So let’s change the scenario: your mother is the only match for your sister’s kidney, and it is absolutely her fault that your sister exists and is alive today. It may even be her fault (genetically or environmentally) that your sister needs a new kidney! Should she be legally obligated to give her body to save your sister?

So, to get back to your original statement, “abortion is murder,” I must ask: if you or your mother said no to your sister and she dies, are you a murderer?

If not, neither are people who get abortions.

Best wishes,

Erin.

(We are still doing the passive-aggressive letter bit, right?)

Damn.

(via soptastic)

erikamoen:

graphicladies:

Susie Cagle for Cartoon Movement.

Investigative comics journalist about “Pregnancy Crisis Centers” and the biased advice they give to deter women from having accurate information on their abortion options.

This makes me so angry I cannot even.

(via soptastic)

Salon.com (via vagabond-dreams)

The abortion that Mitt doesn’t talk about anymore

(via bebinn)

THIS IS WHY SAFE ABORTION IS IMPORTANT.

You’d think that telling “pro-life” that 70,000 uterus bearers die every year due to unsafe abortion leaving behind 220,000 kids, would be enough for them to be like, “hmmm ok, maybe this isn’t a good idea to abolish it after all.”

But no no, they’ll say something like, “those little sluts should have kept their legs shut.”

Fuck you “pro-life”. Fuck you.

(via stfuhypocrisy)

My grandfather is super pro-choice and safe abortion for this reason. He worked in an emergency room in Brooklyn way before Roe v. Wade and would see some really sad and sick shit, like a person with part of a fetus hanging out and bleeding coming into the ER because they got a back alley abortion or tried to perform something on their own. This should never happen anywhere in the world. 

(via strugglingtobeheard)

All. Of. This.

(via lostgrrrls)

This. I literally will never understand the depths of idiocy it requires to believe abortion should be outlawed.

(via soptastic)

doomtothedoomed:

inherhipstheresrevolutions:

onmostsurfaces:

Americans have aborted 0 children, actually. 

hahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahaa NO.

you can’t abort children who the fuck made this god damn

(via deactivatedshark-deactivated201)