*birth control
*I had mistakenly used the word “abortion” instead of “birth control” so I have now fix/edited that.
Pat, thanks for your honest feedback, I have been meaning to respond to your comment, here’s my honest feedback:
Basically, the idea of focusing on trying to get Trump/current GOP to pass a federal heartbeat bill with no exceptions is not only futile, totally futile, but it would sabotage the pro-life movement.
Firstly, pro-life leaders, such as Lila Rose, have already put immense time and effort trying to convince Trump to support even basic restrictions. They already tried your suggestion. He not only said no, but he even called DeSantis’ heartbeat bill “horrible.” Not because he hates unborn babies or values women’s “choice.” But because he knew that support for six week restrictions was political suicide. (I disagree with the fact that Trump opposed signing even a reasonable 15 week restriction, he probably lost a few pro-life votes as a result and this gave me hesitancy to offer my vote as well.)
In fact, DeSantis killed his chances at beating Trump for the GOP nomination for president when he signed the six week abortion restriction and refused to answer questions on whether he would do so on a federal level as president. And in fact, in the last election, in Florida, a Trump-voting state, the majority of Floridians (56%) voted to overturn that six abortion ban, in exchange for an abortion-until-birth ballot measure. (The only reason why it didn’t pass was because Florida requires a 60% vote rate to pass, unlike other states.) Abortion-until-birth ballot measures have passed almost every time that they were placed on the ballot, including red states like Ohio and Missouri. They ALMOST passed one in Nebraska.
Post-edit addition: We Must Continue Changing Hearts and Minds Against Abortion - LifeNews.com
In another state, voters had a choice between a restriction at the second trimester and an abortion-until-birth, and luckily they chose the moderate option.
The current Democrat governor of red-state Kentucky won because he said he supported rape exceptions and because the GOP nominee supported the strict ban. In blue leaning, Harris voting Virginia, with republican Governor Youngkin, who insisted he only supported moderate restrictions, and not a full ban, they maintained their same number of state legislative seats they had before in the last election. They didn’t gain enough seats to pass any new pro-life laws, but at least they maintained the same number of seats they had before, to protect their state legislature from a blue wave in a previous midterm election.
If GOP nominees, legislators and/or the president gave serious consideration to passing a federal six week ban, they would lose control of congress, and then the presidency and would not be able to advance any Republican laws, or any basic pro-life protections such as the ones I suggested. It would be a disaster.
Again, I am saying that even just talking seriously about support for a six week ban would be disastrous for Republicans and pro-lifers, even if they never pass a six week ban.
Even if you do manage to convince the majority of Congress to pass a federal six week abortion ban, you are tragically so wrong to think that this would encourage the Democrats to respond with bipartisan legislation. I have paid close attention to things that Democrats and abortion activists say, to the polls, various news articles, OB-GYN’s, pro-life articles, and I can tell you FOR A FACT what would happen if Congress passed (or merely promoted the idea of) a six week abortion ban…
Oh, the Democrats would LOVE that! Love, love, love! They’d relish it! It would revive their political campaigns like never before. Regardless of how beautiful pro-lifers think of themselves to legally protect babies from abortion violence, the majority of Americans do NOT see it that way. No matter how many awesome, amazing, intelligent, well-researched videos, articles and speeches that pro-life leaders give, the pro-choice movement is winning in terms of public perception. It sucks, but it’s just true. The American public perception views strict abortion bans as too extreme, unfair, and ignorant, and that a lack of commonly supported exceptions is cruel.
In our current state of things, at least women in states that don’t offer them exceptions can at least get an abortion out of state. But with a federal six week ban, with no exceptions, the lack of such an option will only intensify the opposition towards pro-life laws. You will see anti-life headlines multiply like a plague… women with babies with fatal abnormalities, raped women, 12 year old girls. That’s in addition to the stories of women dying or being injured because the hospital delayed lifesaving treatment. Democrats and the pro-abortion movement are making martyrs, sacrificial lambs out of these women. I recently read a story about a young pro-life woman, who died in Texas because the doctors violated medical standards and blamed pro-life laws for their medical malpractice. The woman’s mother is also pro-life and knew it was the doctor’s fault. She tried to find a lawyer to sue for medical malpractice, but supposedly couldn’t find one to take the case. This is a situation in which this law would help to prosecute for medical malpractice. We have to take back the narrative.
The result of federal legislators supporting, or even seriously mentioning the idea of six week bans, would feed a Blue wave for midterms and the next election, and in four years, a Democrat president will pass the pro-abortion-until-birth law “Women’s Health Protection Act,” they will forever control the narrative about past abortion bans supposedly killing women, and the actual harms caused by the lack of exceptions, and that’s where the pro-life movement will die, or perhaps hibernate for another few decades… meaning after that, we will not be able to pass any meaningful abortion restrictions and the truth about elective abortion will be buried once again.
Bottom line: The majority of Americans are pro-choice. The majority support exceptions, including the majority of pro-lifers. The majority opposes late term abortion. The majority support basic pro-life protections. HOWEVER, if you give Americans a choice between six week abortion bans versus abortion until birth, they choose the latter. If you fight for all-or-nothing, nothing is what you will get.
There is absolutely NO evidence of Democrats and the abortion movement backing down on their desire for full abortion-until-birth laws. NONE! All evidence points to the very opposite! Again, they think that 24 week restrictions, with exceptions for mental health until birth, is their “compromise.” Listen to what EVERY elected Democrat has said—they will not “compromise” on the Women’s Health Protection Act and won’t even offer conscience protections for healthcare workers.
I suspect that your hesitance in supporting anything other than a strict abortion ban, has more to do with your opinion of yourself than anything else. You would feel lesser of yourself to admit that support for more moderately appealing abortion regulations would be more effective to the pro-life cause than six week bans. I really feel that’s what’s holding you back.
**Please read this recent pro-life article that supports what I’m trying to tell you: **
You claim that my policy “includes provisions that harm the taxpayer.” Here’s my quick responses to that:
-
paying taxes does not equal “harm.” That’s your opinion.
-
Women and parents, in total, make up more than half of taxpayers. And former fetuses make up 100% of all tax-payers. So actually, all of these provisions help taxpayers.
-
The meat of my proposal (abortion exceptions and the small pro-life concessions) does NOT involve any significant tax payer funding.
-
Regarding the portions that do involve more funding, is something that federal legislators are perfectly capable of deciding which priorities are worth it and which ones aren’t. I bet pro-lifer leaders would welcome any aid that the government could authorize to help keep dangerous doctors accountable for killing and endangering women. In exchange, the government could recover revenues from fines imposed against those violating this law, committing medical malpractice or fraud. Pro-lifers would welcome the idea of legislation to ensure that vulnerable populations, such as children with Down Syndrome, and Trisomy 18, get the care they are often denied. And my idea for a right to “education and coaching on management of pregnancy and parenting” is really an extension of the very mission of pregnancy crisis centers. The pro-life movement is weakened by being out-funded by the pro-abortion movement. So more funding to educational and awareness would only help the pro-life movement as well as families.
-
Again, voting on this policy does NOT mean you agree with every little thing, nor does it compel GOP legislators to authorize all this funding, because they are perfectly capable of figuring out how much spending or priorities they can get away with.
I see a couple of misconceptions in your latest response. The constitutional amendments passed because of FRAUD, not because the people believe that a sex weeks ban is too low. We should hold the system accountable for allowing constitutional amendments that pass because of fraud, and I have some ideas that I am sharing with appropriate people.
Moreover, our own policies and what we seek to enact should have nothing to do with the views of Trump or DeSantis, and I am firmly convinced that DeSantis’ failure had nothing to do with his signing the 6 weeks ban into law. That is a LIE told by pro-aborts to bolster the idea that they have more support than they have and that abortion is a more important issue to most people than it is. We need to educate Trump as well. We won’t do it by going along with his current expressed views. Since his power in this area has been strictly limited by SCOTUS, it is pretty much moot anyway.
The statistics show that the vast majority of Americans favor limiting abortion to the first trimester. Please keep in mind that the vast majority BY FAR of abortions are done in the first trimester. Pro-aborts aren’t giving up much to agree to 15 weeks. But they will never agree to your proposal if they truly want abortion up to birth.
I stand corrected on what you are proposing regarding age limit.
“I suspect that your hesitance in supporting anything other than a strict abortion ban, has more to do with your opinion of yourself than anything else. You would feel lesser of yourself to admit that support for more moderately appealing abortion regulations would be more effective to the pro-life cause than six week bans. I really feel that’s what’s holding you back.”
This is a NASTY ACCUSATION and totally untrue. My hesitance in supporting anything other than a strict abortion ban is because ALL THE BABIES ARE HUMAN BEINGS ENDOWED BY THEIR CREATOR WITH THE RIGHT TO LIFE, MADE IN GOD’S IMAGE. It has nothing to do with my view of myself. Such an accusation is unworthy of you. An apology would be nice, but I don’t expect it.
Communism harms everyone except the elite. Taxes from one person to give to another is communism. It is also unconstitutional. Communism even harms the RECIPIENTS. Our solutions need to focus on what private charity can do. Charity is none of the government’s business. I can accept the current situation and work for more privatization. I don’t want to leave women without recourse, so we must replace government help, not just eliminate it.
I don’t vote to support an idea that I think is fundamentally flawed.
Now regarding rape, this is totally the wrong approach. Pro-life people need to stop cooperating with pro-aborts who are using rape victims as POLITICAL PAWNS, because that is EXACTLY what is happening. Instead of going along with this, we need to educate pro-life people. And we need to make sure that rape and incest victims get the support they need to avoid being raped with surgical instruments.
I have prepared some links to help you understand the situation with rape victims. Along with that, I will relate the following briefly:
I have known three women who got pregnant from rape. Two bore and raised their children. They thrived. The other got an abortion. She was in and out of mental hospitals for the next ten years, and it destroyed her marriage. She also lost four wanted children subsequently because of her abortion. She is still a valued family member.
I personally narrowly escaped being subjected to abortion through LIES. I was in the hospital. My doctor was pro-life. But he referred me to an abortionist I didn’t know. The abortionist tried to deceive me and coerce me into an abortion by telling me I would not survive without it and I’d had a miscarriage. When I learned what he had done, I had horrible nightmares for months afterward, like the ones many abortion-experienced mothers have. I can still remember some of them in vivid technicolor. I wouldn’t wish that off on anyone, least of all a rape survivor.
The man who built the shell of our house, a personal friend, had a daughter (I think an only child). She worked at a shopping mall, and one night she left work at 10 PM, and the security guard offered to accompany her to her car. She turned him down. In the parking lot, she was carjacked, taken out into the desert, and brutally raped and murdered.
This is personal for me.
Now please consider this. People who argue for legal abortion for rape victims are using rape victims as political pawns, and that is despicable. We must never cooperate with such behavior. For a pro-life person to advocate an exception to illegal abortion for rape is misplaced compassion. In pregnancy, mother and baby are a dyad. Harm one, and you harm the other. They are a package deal. True compassion doesn’t advocate disrupting that relationship. We should try to educate pro-life people who are misplacing their compassion, rather than playing along with them.
“I’m not your argument for abortion. Plain and simple.” Rape victim on TikTok.
I want to put some real faces on this issue. This is not a theoretical issue. It involves real people.
More:
We seriously need to educate pro-life people that we need to stop cooperating with pro-abortion people who use rape victims as political pawns and recognize that they are human beings, and so are their babies. They deserve better than abortion. Instead of acquiescing to so many pro-life people abandoning rape victims, we need to educate them. Will you join me?
1 Like
Can you please define the following terms:
- life-sustaining body organs
- nonviable pregnancies;
- severe/non-viable/fatal fetal abnormalities
Response to Michael, these definitions should be worked out in collaboration with OB-GYN’s, neonatologists and pediatric doctors, who come from a mix of either pro-life and pro-choice.
However as a layperson, here’s what I mean in reference to:
life-sustaining body organs… organs or parts of the body that are necessary for maintaining survival
nonviable pregnancies… a pregnancy which has been determined will not last to reach a viable gestational age for the child. For example, when the doctor determines that a miscarriage is inevitable.
severe/nonviable/fatal abnormalities… cases in which the doctor determined that the child has a condition that is likely fatal/incompatible with life, regardless of available medical interventions. I would consider Trisomy 18 or anencephaly to be severe/nonviable. I would *** NOT *** consider Down Syndrome, in of itself, as “severe.”
Again, these definitions would have to be worked out between the legislators and doctors.
So you’re asking me/us to support legislation that is undefined, but should be defined in the future by some unknown individuals, that may have hidden agendas?
To quote Shark Tank: It’s too early for me. I’m out.
1 Like
Michael, believe it or not, but this website does not create laws; legislators do, so why would the final wording/definition be up to me?
And if you dislike the definitions that I just provided to you, then try the dictionary. Those words you asked for ALREADY have definitions. Troll.
I don’t know how you had the time to put this together. I’m not on board 100% with everything in here, but honestly, I agree with you- we need to get our foot in the door. I am a huge advocate of the education in high school. The teens I know (having a teenager myself) are completely miseducated, and unfortunately, they will be the ones making and implementing changes. We have to do as the far-left did and get into the school system. Children need a complete education about human life and development.
1 Like
I voted for this the amount of detail is fantastic and I think it will reduce the abortion rate. Anything Helps. Currently Earths population is in decline, with birth rates and excess deaths currently it may not be enough in time to prevent societal collapse that will occur. Current system encourages females to terminate their children. Extinction is not really a strong position to push.
1 Like
I agree with this. At 32 weeks I was diagnosed with pre eclampsia, and granted I did go through my fair share of mistreatment and lack of proper maternal care; abortion was never an option for anyone. Once I had gotten to the womans hospital, they simply told me I’d have a c-section and my baby was well taken care of by a group of fantastic doctors and nurses. We’re both alive, well and thriving.
So many people are quick to ask for an abortion but I’ve seen first hand that babies are strong enough to fight. They’re humans who make a consious effort to survive. Who are we to deny them that right?
3 Likes
There’s a very easy way to stop abortion propaganda, ban fetal tissue recovered from abortion from use in medical products.
Next, get the federal government and state governments out of the healthcare business.
1 Like
In that situation, where your unborn child is already past viability, my proposal would not allow the mother to purposely kill the child in the process of delivery.
Response to Pat- I wasn’t trying to be “nasty”–that was the best reason I could think of to explain a few things you had said: You keep attacking my ideas as “despicable” for supporting exceptions, while simultaneously shooting down viable ideas to support the cause you claim to be attacking me for, and naively telling pro-lifers to wait and wait for Democrats to propose a compromise that you know will never, ever come, while women and unborn children continue to suffer and die. Therefore, it seems like an open acknowledgement to the merits of my “despicable” proposal would make you think “despicably” or lower of yourself, as if it’d be injuring the image you want for yourself and your idea of integrity or piety. Whereas I’m more concerned with just trying to do something; I just want to get something done, within the confines of the few choices that we have available.
I have also faced tough pregnancies. They were unwanted pregnancies and I also chose life. I do not mandate abortion for people with these exceptions or advocating to take away their support; quite the opposite. And my experiences and knowledge tell me that it’s not a black and white issue; it’s a nuanced issue that requires nuanced solutions.
When I get the chance, I will definitely read through all the links you shared.
You also said something intriguing: “The constitutional amendments passed because of FRAUD, not because the people believe that a six weeks ban is too low. We should hold the system accountable for allowing constitutional amendments that pass because of fraud, and I have some ideas that I am sharing with appropriate people.”
Would you please share with me your ideas about that? Personally, I think that these pro-abortion ballot measures are unconstitutional on its face, but I’m not aware of any legal leg to stand on, to challenge those. I don’t think that unelected citizens should be allowed to vote to deprive any person of their “due process rights” to life, liberty and property. I feel that this violates the due process rights for all unborn babies. Are you saying that you believe that there is a legitimate means to challenge those ballot measures?
Finally, in response to you saying the “pro-abortion” people would never support my proposal? My quick responses:
- False: many pro-choice people have supported, cheered on and voted on my policy. Many pro-lifers have voted on it, not necessarily for agreeing on every thing, but supporting the direction that it’s going.
- Given a GOP trifecta, it’s not necessary to get any Democrat’s vote to pass a proposal like this. We only need the support of Trump and the Republicans. And all final edits are in their hands, not mine. They are free to work together to edit this policy into one they all agree on.
- OTOH, the GOP could easily get the Dem’s cornered into agreement. The Dem’s will know that if they don’t vote on it, the GOP will say that it’s the Dem’s who are trying to kill women.
- Also, if this bill passes in a well-implemented way, the added protections for women and accountability against dangerous medical providers, will cause MORE people to gain back support/confidence for pro-life laws… Remember, the reason why support is slipping for pro-life laws is because of these headlines blaming pro-life laws for women dying, and for severe cases in which there was no exceptions… The enforceable protections that this bill offers would reverse that narrative and the misinformation… As a result, we keep a path open for the next president to support a 15 week restriction. Less people would be clamoring to vote on a pro-abortion ballot initiative. And more pro-life governors and state legislators would feel comfortable passing more abortion restrictions.
Of course, pro-choice advocates will continue to advocate for more abortion access. But they won’t be able to fearmonger people as effectively and we can have more balanced discussions about it. In addition, it will lesson pro-lifers worries about fetal pain, third trimester abortions or infanticide.
I’m aware that Americans tend to favor restrictions against late term abortion, often at 15 weeks. I have paid very close attention to the polls in the last couple years. HOWEVER, that support has decreased a little bit. You get more people answering that they are unsure. All in all, these headlines are causing just enough doubt to tip the scales to this uncertainty, and allowing opportunities for abortion activists to pass these ballot initiatives. Again, I firmly believe that if implemented well, support for 15 week restrictions would go back up. If we do nothing, or choose to sabotage our case, then things will only get worse.
I know that the federal government can reduce funding for Planned Parenthood, HOWEVER sanctuary states (like California) will continue to fund abortions anyway and encourage people from out of state to get their abortions here. In addition, if you take away Medi-caid funding for all abortions, then the cost of abortion, and time it may take to get that money, will drive the desperate women into more late term abortions. My point isn’t to support the funding, just to think about all the factors and face the desperate reality of the pro-life movement.
I’ll be viewed as crazy and a crazy religious person but…start following the 10 Commandments which clearly state thou shall not kill and fornicate. Parents need to be more responsible raising their children, hold them responsible! I know most will say that’s not realistic in today’s world but maybe we should start trying.
1 Like
I am not saying you were trying to be nasty. But for you to judge me and tell me what I am thinking is simply totally inappropriate. I NEVER speak for someone else; if someone asks me what other people think, I tell them I am not a mind reader and I don’t know. I get this question often in surveys (I take a lot of surveys). Furthermore, saying that because I said the proposal was this and that is not a reason for a personal attack. I attacked the proposal, not you.
It would take quite a few people moving into the unsure column about 15 weeks to push the 75% or so who supported a ban after 15 weeks into majority opposition.
Granted, some pro-abortion individuals will support your proposal. But they’re not elected officials, and they’re not the leaders. That makes a difference.
I’m still working on the legal basis for taking down the constitutional amendments. I need to do some serious legal research, and I haven’t had time to do that. So I’m not prepared to air any ideas publicly at this time.
In the rest of your message, you make some good points. That said, I maintain it is still too complex, and will be opposed because of some provisions I believe are even unnecessary (since we should allow crisis pregnancy centers to provide the necessary support for women). I am for saving as many babies as possible. I just think we need to go about it in a way of integrity, and throwing some babies and mothers under the bus is not that way. We must be careful that we are not actively denying some babies and mothers legal protection as we move to save the babies we can.
Thank you for agreeing to read my links.
Why is fetal pain relief only 15 weeks or more? It should be given earlier than this as well. At 12 weeks gestation babies have all their organs and can move about in the womb. I think pain relief/anesthesia should be given as early as 10 weeks gestation.
The problem with what you are saying is that we are a very long ways away from holding people to the Ten Commandments. Our society in general is winking at people who fornicate. Many young people don’t even think of it as being wrong. And that includes parents who need to teach their children. In our family, we all set a good example: parents and grandparents who kept sex where it belongs. I did explain to the children that sex outside of marriage is wrong. But they got out into society, and at least two, more probably five, did it anyway. Furthermore, out of seven children, four are divorced, which is higher than average. I am ashamed. Our public indoctrination centers, wrongly named “schools” have been teaching generations to ignore the Ten Commandments and that sex is for pleasure. People who teach fornication and contraception are brought into health classes.
We walk a tightrope. We don’t want a woman who conceived out of wedlock to feel she has to have an abortion to prevent herself from being judged and discriminated against. We don’t want the woman to take the blame and leave the father free of condemnation.
Our ultimate task is to make abortion unthinkable. This may not be possible in a sin-filled world, but it should still be our goal, and we can move back in that direction quite a ways, since before legalization, abortion was seen as a shameful act which most women avoided. Keep in mind that when a state passes laws that restrict abortion access (parental notification, waiting periods, etc.) the incidence of inappropriate pregnancy drop significantly in the first place. Along with making abortion unthinkable, we can also move society back in the direction of seeing shacking up as a black mark on the integrity of the person.
2 Likes
We have eyewitness accounts of doctors who operate on women for tubal pregnancies that a baby at six weeks avoids something likely to cause pain, such as a pin prick. The idea that the baby doesn’t perceive pain until many weeks later is simply false.
Excellent! Kind, rational, informed, well done Ashley! I sincerely hope this administration reads and considered your proposal. It would be wonderful if there could be a focus group with Trump and his advisors as well, and if that group would include you and other everyday people trying to make this country a better place for EVERYONE!
1 Like
Pat thank you again for your feedback. I’m intrigued by your ideas for taking down the constitutional amendments. Fill me in later on after you have more details to share. That sounds pretty bada $$ .
Also, calling someone’s thoughts/proposal “despicable” or “immoral,” “horrible”, etc. all the negative ways that you repeatedly and incessantly characterized my thoughts is the same thing as attacking MY intent/character. YOU judged me FIRST and it’s been quite a headache for me. Maybe you should stop that and I will quit pointing that out.