JayEmJay
raccoon82:

 
What provinces send thwir third trimester abortion patients to the states? That would mean the person getting the abortion would need a valid passport - something a minor cannot get without a parental signature. Not to mention airfare or greyhound fare, hotels and numerous other amenities would need to be covered. And why would we send patients to a place where they would pay thru the nose for something that is at least partially (and fully for those that are medically necessary - third trimester abortions usually) covered by provincial and federal health care laws? In the maritimes, yes the Morgentaler clinic has been closed serving PEI, new Brunswick and nova scotia. But hospitals still provide abortions.

At the time the presentation, Quebec was sending patients to Wichita, Kansas, Boulder, Colorado, and an undisclosed site in New York State.
(documented here: http://www.bigbluewave.ca/2011/02/portrait-of-late-term-abortion-demand.html)
At the time of the presentation, it was not absolutely necessary to get a passport. A patient could drive to Plattsburgh or some other US City, and get on a plane. I did it myself in 2007, and I didn’t have a passport. Now a passport is needed to drive to the States, but many Canadians already have them.
Minors indeed are not sent to the States for late-term abortions. In Quebec, Sainte Justine Hospital in Montreal performs late-term abortions on adolescents.
The airfare and travel expenses are paid reimbursed by the taxpayer. The Abortioneers blog will testify to this:
http://abortioneers.blogspot.ca/2011/05/medical-tourism.html
The reason Canadians are sent to the States for elective abortions is the lack of medical professionals willing to do elective procedures past 20 weeks. It’s also a question of a lack of population base. In order to be able to be a competent surgical abortionist, you need to do a certain number of them every year to keep up your skills, otherwise your skills atrophy. Canada does not have the population base for abortionists to develop those skills.
Hospitals provide abortions for medically-related abortions, but if you get to 24 weeks, and you’re not a “special case” in Canada— e.g. a minor, a woman who didn’t know she was pregnant, a refugee, having a baby with a fetal anomaly— it’s difficult (but not impossible!) to get an elective third trimester abortion  

raccoon82:

 

What provinces send thwir third trimester abortion patients to the states? That would mean the person getting the abortion would need a valid passport - something a minor cannot get without a parental signature. Not to mention airfare or greyhound fare, hotels and numerous other amenities would need to be covered. And why would we send patients to a place where they would pay thru the nose for something that is at least partially (and fully for those that are medically necessary - third trimester abortions usually) covered by provincial and federal health care laws? In the maritimes, yes the Morgentaler clinic has been closed serving PEI, new Brunswick and nova scotia. But hospitals still provide abortions.

At the time the presentation, Quebec was sending patients to Wichita, Kansas, Boulder, Colorado, and an undisclosed site in New York State.

(documented here: http://www.bigbluewave.ca/2011/02/portrait-of-late-term-abortion-demand.html)

At the time of the presentation, it was not absolutely necessary to get a passport. A patient could drive to Plattsburgh or some other US City, and get on a plane. I did it myself in 2007, and I didn’t have a passport. Now a passport is needed to drive to the States, but many Canadians already have them.

Minors indeed are not sent to the States for late-term abortions. In Quebec, Sainte Justine Hospital in Montreal performs late-term abortions on adolescents.

The airfare and travel expenses are paid reimbursed by the taxpayer. The Abortioneers blog will testify to this:

http://abortioneers.blogspot.ca/2011/05/medical-tourism.html

The reason Canadians are sent to the States for elective abortions is the lack of medical professionals willing to do elective procedures past 20 weeks. It’s also a question of a lack of population base. In order to be able to be a competent surgical abortionist, you need to do a certain number of them every year to keep up your skills, otherwise your skills atrophy. Canada does not have the population base for abortionists to develop those skills.

Hospitals provide abortions for medically-related abortions, but if you get to 24 weeks, and you’re not a “special case” in Canada— e.g. a minor, a woman who didn’t know she was pregnant, a refugee, having a baby with a fetal anomaly— it’s difficult (but not impossible!) to get an elective third trimester abortion  

cultureshift:

Learn more.

philosophicalconservatism:

Do not believe the assurances of your ideological opponent  (“don’t worry, we only intend to go this far with this particular policy”) believe the logical consequences of  his intellectual position. For a man may dissemble for political expedience, or he may not even himself know what policies he will eventually come to embrace, but the intellectual sensibilities which guide him will ultimately lead him to their natural consequence. 

oh-snap-pro-choice:

twocrowns:

oh-snap-pro-choice:

twocrowns:

oh-snap-pro-choice:

twocrowns:

persephoneholly:

twocrowns:

Social Justice. #prolife #tcot #roft

You mean fetuses. How about you focus on the starving or the homeless. Y’know, people who need help.

Yeah I mean fetuses. Fetuses are human beings. 
Why do I focus on the unborn? Because they are the most vulnerable human beings of all.

Why do I focus on the unborn? Because potential humans mean more than actual sentient feeling people, who don’t deserve their rights if they had sex and fall pregnant. -Ash

A fetus is not a “potential human”.
As a member of our species, a fetus is a human being like everyone else.
Feelings, or other abilities that humans acquire in later stages of development do no make us superior.
All human beings are  equal, regardless of stage of development, age, or ability.

The ability to feel pain is incredibly important in the abortion debate. Pregnant people feel pain. They can suffer. Forced pregnancy is so traumatic that the UN has called it a form of torture. Foetuses cannot feel pain, are not sentient. By outlawing abortion you are telling pregnant people that the foetus in their body has the right to own their body. That they cannot dictate who uses their organs. How is that equal? -Ash

The ability to feel pain  does not determine the value of a human being.
Forced pregnancy may be traumatic, but abortion actually destroys a human being. Feelings and suffering can be healed, death cannot. That`s why the death of a human being is a greater evil than psychological suffering.
Fetuses don’t have a `right` to a body. What they are entitled to is the care and the love of their parents. Once you create life, you create the responsibility to take care of that life. It`s not the fetus dictating what you do with the body; it’s the circumstances that demand that parents take care of their children.
How is that equal? We are all entitled to the care of our parents as children. That’s how it’s equal.

So you would rather people be tortured than get an abortion. That makes total sense and totally shows how you regard both foetus and pregnant person in equally. The simple ‘but’ just completely shows your disregard for pregnant people, and you still want to say you care for them?
Sorry but bullshit. Even when born, of the circumstances call parents aren’t forced to give their organs to their children, even if the child would die without it. Ever. That doesn’t happen. So why would you go for it in pregnancy? What makes the foetus so above already born people? -Ash

The overwhelming majority of women who go through an unwanted  pregnancy are not “tortured”. Mental issues can be dealt with through counselling, and are of a temporary nature. 
See what you are advocating is that a human being has to die in the name of psychological comfort. However grave the problem is— and I don’t deny that there are people with serious psychological issues— it doesn’t justify that a human being should die. See, involuntary death is always a worse evil, because death destroys the human person, whereas what abortion rights advocates invoke to justify abortion is a lesser good. Feelings, economics, circumstances, education, will never equal the value of a human life.
I don’t disregard pregnant people, having been pregnant myself several times. However, abortion rights advocates routinely dismiss the value of human life. I don’t want pregnant people to suffer: but the solutions I propose do not involve killing. Abortion rights advocates always propose the choice of killing a human being  to solve a problem. That’s unacceptable.
Nobody is forced to give a fetus a uterus. Uteruses are not “donated”. The fetus does not own it. The unwillingness to carry a baby does not amount to a donation. Being forced to carry out one’s responsibility is not donating a uterus. At minimum, to carry out her responsibility, a woman has to do nothing, and then eventually give birth. That’s the minimum she has to do. Just because you don’t want the fetus in your uterus doesn’t mean you get to kill that fetus. Your baby, your responsibility. 

oh-snap-pro-choice:

twocrowns:

oh-snap-pro-choice:

twocrowns:

oh-snap-pro-choice:

twocrowns:

persephoneholly:

twocrowns:

Social Justice. #prolife #tcot #roft

You mean fetuses. How about you focus on the starving or the homeless. Y’know, people who need help.

Yeah I mean fetuses. Fetuses are human beings. 

Why do I focus on the unborn? Because they are the most vulnerable human beings of all.

Why do I focus on the unborn?
Because potential humans mean more than actual sentient feeling people, who don’t deserve their rights if they had sex and fall pregnant.
-Ash

A fetus is not a “potential human”.

As a member of our species, a fetus is a human being like everyone else.

Feelings, or other abilities that humans acquire in later stages of development do no make us superior.

All human beings are  equal, regardless of stage of development, age, or ability.

The ability to feel pain is incredibly important in the abortion debate.
Pregnant people feel pain. They can suffer. Forced pregnancy is so traumatic that the UN has called it a form of torture. Foetuses cannot feel pain, are not sentient.
By outlawing abortion you are telling pregnant people that the foetus in their body has the right to own their body. That they cannot dictate who uses their organs. How is that equal?
-Ash

The ability to feel pain  does not determine the value of a human being.

Forced pregnancy may be traumatic, but abortion actually destroys a human being. Feelings and suffering can be healed, death cannot. That`s why the death of a human being is a greater evil than psychological suffering.

Fetuses don’t have a `right` to a body. What they are entitled to is the care and the love of their parents. Once you create life, you create the responsibility to take care of that life. It`s not the fetus dictating what you do with the body; it’s the circumstances that demand that parents take care of their children.

How is that equal? We are all entitled to the care of our parents as children. That’s how it’s equal.

So you would rather people be tortured than get an abortion. That makes total sense and totally shows how you regard both foetus and pregnant person in equally. The simple ‘but’ just completely shows your disregard for pregnant people, and you still want to say you care for them?


Sorry but bullshit. Even when born, of the circumstances call parents aren’t forced to give their organs to their children, even if the child would die without it. Ever. That doesn’t happen. So why would you go for it in pregnancy? What makes the foetus so above already born people?
-Ash

The overwhelming majority of women who go through an unwanted  pregnancy are not “tortured”. Mental issues can be dealt with through counselling, and are of a temporary nature. 

See what you are advocating is that a human being has to die in the name of psychological comfort. However grave the problem is— and I don’t deny that there are people with serious psychological issues— it doesn’t justify that a human being should die. See, involuntary death is always a worse evil, because death destroys the human person, whereas what abortion rights advocates invoke to justify abortion is a lesser good. Feelings, economics, circumstances, education, will never equal the value of a human life.

I don’t disregard pregnant people, having been pregnant myself several times. However, abortion rights advocates routinely dismiss the value of human life. I don’t want pregnant people to suffer: but the solutions I propose do not involve killing. Abortion rights advocates always propose the choice of killing a human being  to solve a problem. That’s unacceptable.

Nobody is forced to give a fetus a uterus. Uteruses are not “donated”. The fetus does not own it. The unwillingness to carry a baby does not amount to a donation. Being forced to carry out one’s responsibility is not donating a uterus. At minimum, to carry out her responsibility, a woman has to do nothing, and then eventually give birth. That’s the minimum she has to do. Just because you don’t want the fetus in your uterus doesn’t mean you get to kill that fetus. Your baby, your responsibility. 

your-lies-ruin-lives:

 

I’m not going to read your essay of a post, just make a few points:
1. Gosnell is an outlier. Added to the fact that because of anti-choice laws and intimidation in front of clinics pro-lifers created Gosnell. If you left the protesting alone, if you didn’t make abortion difficult to get he wouldn’t have existed.
2. No. Knowing you cannot care for a child with a disorder, or knowing the child will live with nothing but pain is not ableism. Stop using terms you don’t know the definition of.
3. Responsibility is not allowing someone to use your body while you are unwilling. You have a responsibility to care for yourself first and abortion is a responsible choice.
4. I would like to see the source of your ‘fact.’

Twocrowns, where the outliers are total law.. but the prolife clinic bombers, doctor killers.. are totally just a rarity. Logic fail. 

1. Your original contention was that abortions past viability happened only due to genetic deformities, health emergencies and medical issues.  Gosnell was not an outlier.
I can name other abortionists who are known to have performed shoddy abortion work in clinics:
Steve Brigham
Nicola Riley
Shelley Sella— who botched a 35 week abortion
Leroy Carhart
James Prendergaft— who’s had multi-million dollar settlements against him and still operates LateTermAbortion.net — 
These are late-term abortionists with a very long rap sheet that the abortion rights movements either unconditionally supports or has failed to stop.
We protest first because abortion is wrong, and secondly to offer help. Don’t blame pro-lifers for dead babies. It’s abortion that killed these babies.
2. It is ableism to decide that another human being has to die because they don’t live up to a certain level of functioning. If you really cannot take care of a child, you can make the child a ward of a state. That child has rights whether you can take care of a child or not.
As for pain, pain is treatable. There are narcotics, and, in worst case scenarios, one can induce a coma. Babies should not have to die because of their pain.
3. Responsibility is yours, whether you are willing or not. See, if I create a situation, I am responsible for that situation whether I will it or not. If I create a baby, I am responsible for that baby, whether I will it or not. Even if I don`t want the baby to occupy my uterus, I am still responsible for that baby, and my unwillingness doesn’t undo it.  Caring for oneself doesn’t justify shirking the responsibility you created, the human life you created.
4. My source for my fact is Suzanne Carriere, responsible for “special services” at the Jeanne Mance Health Unit in Montreal, which is in charge of booking late-term abortions for many regions in Quebec. She gave a presentation concerning abortion access on the occasion of the 20th anniversary of the Morgentaler decision that decriminalized abortion in Canada. I have documented her words in a blog post:
http://www.bigbluewave.ca/2012/07/are-third-trimester-abortions-performed.html
The National Right to Life Committee has documented the words of a number of abortionists who’ve admitted that many late-term abortions are elective:
http://www.nrlc.org/archive/abortion/pba/pbafact10.html

your-lies-ruin-lives:

 

I’m not going to read your essay of a post, just make a few points:

1. Gosnell is an outlier. Added to the fact that because of anti-choice laws and intimidation in front of clinics pro-lifers created Gosnell. If you left the protesting alone, if you didn’t make abortion difficult to get he wouldn’t have existed.

2. No. Knowing you cannot care for a child with a disorder, or knowing the child will live with nothing but pain is not ableism. Stop using terms you don’t know the definition of.

3. Responsibility is not allowing someone to use your body while you are unwilling. You have a responsibility to care for yourself first and abortion is a responsible choice.

4. I would like to see the source of your ‘fact.’

Twocrowns, where the outliers are total law.. but the prolife clinic bombers, doctor killers.. are totally just a rarity. Logic fail. 

1. Your original contention was that abortions past viability happened only due to genetic deformities, health emergencies and medical issues.  Gosnell was not an outlier.

I can name other abortionists who are known to have performed shoddy abortion work in clinics:

Steve Brigham

Nicola Riley

Shelley Sella— who botched a 35 week abortion

Leroy Carhart

James Prendergaft— who’s had multi-million dollar settlements against him and still operates LateTermAbortion.net —

These are late-term abortionists with a very long rap sheet that the abortion rights movements either unconditionally supports or has failed to stop.

We protest first because abortion is wrong, and secondly to offer help. Don’t blame pro-lifers for dead babies. It’s abortion that killed these babies.

2. It is ableism to decide that another human being has to die because they don’t live up to a certain level of functioning. If you really cannot take care of a child, you can make the child a ward of a state. That child has rights whether you can take care of a child or not.

As for pain, pain is treatable. There are narcotics, and, in worst case scenarios, one can induce a coma. Babies should not have to die because of their pain.

3. Responsibility is yours, whether you are willing or not. See, if I create a situation, I am responsible for that situation whether I will it or not. If I create a baby, I am responsible for that baby, whether I will it or not. Even if I don`t want the baby to occupy my uterus, I am still responsible for that baby, and my unwillingness doesn’t undo it.  Caring for oneself doesn’t justify shirking the responsibility you created, the human life you created.

4. My source for my fact is Suzanne Carriere, responsible for “special services” at the Jeanne Mance Health Unit in Montreal, which is in charge of booking late-term abortions for many regions in Quebec. She gave a presentation concerning abortion access on the occasion of the 20th anniversary of the Morgentaler decision that decriminalized abortion in Canada. I have documented her words in a blog post:

http://www.bigbluewave.ca/2012/07/are-third-trimester-abortions-performed.html

The National Right to Life Committee has documented the words of a number of abortionists who’ve admitted that many late-term abortions are elective:

http://www.nrlc.org/archive/abortion/pba/pbafact10.html

walkingcringemoment:

twocrowns:

fauxnadian:

twocrowns:

fauxnadian:

oh-snap-pro-choice:

twocrowns:

One reality of abortion. #prolife #tcot

Whatabouttehmenz.jpg
-Ash

Men suffer, too? It’s okay! They can wipe their eyes with the extra money they make that women in the same job with the same or better qualifications don’t! Then they can go get a raise in their career of choice as the ascend past our glass ceiling, get viagra from their insurance company because their religion-obsessed bosses think it’s okay for them to have boners 24/7 but not for women who pay for their own insurance to get birth control!
After that, they can go off to one of these states where women are forced to give birth, where abortions are illegal, and rape a woman because HAHA it’s not like THEY’LL get prosecuted! Especially if she was drunk or wearing a mini-skirt!
Men suffer, too? Don’t FUCKING MAKE ME LAUGH.

The victimhood complex is strong in this one.
#WhyIDontNeedFeminism

Sorry, when rapists get away with illegal behaviour, when men are unfairly paid, when women take up the majority of responsibilities because men are immature, when no one questions mens sexual health but womens health is continuously scrutinized, when abuse is repeatedly perpetuated in majority of a particular gender, when women have to follow societal rules against their will to please a man who they care nothing about? That’s creating a victim.
You can turn a fucking blind eye all you fucking want, but you’re part of the problem and if you don’t want to help, you can kindly go fuck yourself. Your opinion is not only based on ignorance, it’s also based on fucking SELFISHNESS.

The social conservative’s answer to all this: personal responsibility.
Rapists are personally responsible for their actions. Make them pay.
Don’t be a potential victim: take personal responsibility and don’t engage in behaviour that increases the likelihood of being raped.
Arm yourself.
Men’s sexual activity? Social conservatives do not think much of men who don’t take personal responsibility for their children. They don’t think much of men who sleep around and spread STD’s and condoms don’t solve the problem.
Don’t want to please follow societal rules to please men? Then take personal responsibility for your behaviour and go against societal rules and don’t act like you’re a victim because people disapprove, you’re not entitled to people’s approval
Note, how personal responsibility diminishes victimhood.
Personal responsibility is not selfishness. It’s the opposite of selfishness.  
Personal responsibility saves lives.

JayEmJay, I admire your brave and steadfast pro-life stance in the face of so much opposition and, yes, hate thrown your way. However, I can’t abide or agree with a major part of this post. You said women should avoid behaviour that increases the likelihood of being raped. The commentary I am about to post is not meant to attack you or hate on you, but rather to educate you (kindly) so you won’t make those kind of hurtful or bad comments in the future.
By saying women should avoid behaviour that increases the likelihood of being raped, you’re placing the onus of avoiding rape on the victim of rape. This mindset leads to the mindset of, and this applies even if you never intended it, the victim of rape being responsible for the rape, rather than the rapist himself. Further, this mindset can and does and has caused harm in the past to rape victims/survivors. The Toronto Police Chief, a few years back, said that women should ‘stop dressing like sluts if they don’t want to get raped’. This is the Chief of Police. The rank and file cops on the beat and investigating crimes take their cue from him. Not to mention across the First World, women who take their rapists to trial have their sexual history dug up and paraded in front of the court room to make a case of “can we really be sure this was actually rape? Maybe she really wanted it, maybe she led him on, who can say! Look at her character! You can’t convict in the face of this!”
This is real. This is a huge, huge thing in feminism and is a huge source of (righteous) rage and indignation in the feminist movement. Now, you don’t have to consider yourself a feminist (and contrary to popular belief, you’re not a terrible person if you knowingly choose to not consider yourself in line with mainstream feminism, what with its stance on abortion and the like). But this view, this one particular view, that placing the onus on rape victims/survivors to avoid being raped ends with rape victims/survivors being blamed for their rape, is spot on and is a concrete reality.
Now, the person attacking you in this post I’m adding to has a lot of misplaced anger and, in my opinion, totally missed the point of your post (point being that men can suffer from abortion as well, not that men have it worse than women in everything, like this individual seemed to interpret your post as saying, which it didn’t). But when you say ‘personal responsibility’ is the answer to rape, you’re wrong. I’m saying this, as a Christian, lovingly - I am speaking the truth in love, with no abuse or slander or hate thrown your way. You are wrong, dead wrong, if you think the answer to rape is for women to try and avoid behaviors that ‘provoke’ rape or whatever. 
Now I honestly don’t believe you hate or despise women, I don’t. I personally think you just held an ignorant belief (and I do not mean to insult you - lots of people hold ignorant beliefs about lots of things, for a variety of factors and reasons) with no malicious intent. But this is a belief that is demonstrably harmful to women across the world, and I cannot sit here and let you persist in said belief without me lovingly challenging you on it.
Keep advocating for the rights of the unborn, but also please strongly reconsider your views on rape and women. Thanks :)

A mindset of personal responsibility does not blame the victim.
Who commits the crime? The perp.
Is rape ever justified? No.
But  there are times people do contribute to their own victimhood.
It’s true of rape, and of any kind of bad thing that can happen to a human being.
It does not make you responsible for the crime.
But realizing that you can harm your own self-interests with your behaviour helps. It’s empowering.
Examples are abundant. Suppose, for instance, I travel to an underprivileged and predominantly minority neighbourhood that had a lot of violent gang-related activity.
Now would not be a good time to use a lot of racist language. Because if you use a lot of racist language, especially when addressing others, you can expect a violent reaction.
Is a violent reaction to racist language okay? No, it’s not okay.
But is this violent reaction a foreseeable consequence of using racist language? Yes. 
So if you want to keep yourself safe in such a circumstance, don’t use racist language.
Telling people that does not absolve the aggressor of his crime.
It does not diminish the gravity of the crime.
But telling a visitor to such a neighbhood to do that will help keep them safe.
I lock the doors of my car. If someone breaks into my car, is it my fault? No. But a foreseeable consequence of not locking my doors is that people break into my car. It’s not fair that I can’t keep my doors unlocked, but if I lock them, I will keep my stuff safe.
The foreseeable consequence of hanging around horny men at a college party while drinking is sexual assault. This is not rocket science. It’s not blaming the victim for the act. It’s empowering women to let them know so that they avoid these kinds of situations.
So what do we do? Not tell women the truth about foreseeable consequences of their behaviour? Not tell women what to do to avoid rape? How is that loving? People are responsible to avoid negative foreseeable consequences. That’s what personal responsibility is. This is not some kind of conspiracy to keep women down. This is common sense. It applies to every situation and to every person. 

walkingcringemoment:

twocrowns:

fauxnadian:

twocrowns:

fauxnadian:

oh-snap-pro-choice:

twocrowns:

One reality of abortion. #prolife #tcot

Whatabouttehmenz.jpg

-Ash

Men suffer, too? It’s okay! They can wipe their eyes with the extra money they make that women in the same job with the same or better qualifications don’t! Then they can go get a raise in their career of choice as the ascend past our glass ceiling, get viagra from their insurance company because their religion-obsessed bosses think it’s okay for them to have boners 24/7 but not for women who pay for their own insurance to get birth control!

After that, they can go off to one of these states where women are forced to give birth, where abortions are illegal, and rape a woman because HAHA it’s not like THEY’LL get prosecuted! Especially if she was drunk or wearing a mini-skirt!

Men suffer, too? Don’t FUCKING MAKE ME LAUGH.

The victimhood complex is strong in this one.

#WhyIDontNeedFeminism

Sorry, when rapists get away with illegal behaviour, when men are unfairly paid, when women take up the majority of responsibilities because men are immature, when no one questions mens sexual health but womens health is continuously scrutinized, when abuse is repeatedly perpetuated in majority of a particular gender, when women have to follow societal rules against their will to please a man who they care nothing about? That’s creating a victim.

You can turn a fucking blind eye all you fucking want, but you’re part of the problem and if you don’t want to help, you can kindly go fuck yourself. Your opinion is not only based on ignorance, it’s also based on fucking SELFISHNESS.

The social conservative’s answer to all this: personal responsibility.

Rapists are personally responsible for their actions. Make them pay.

Don’t be a potential victim: take personal responsibility and don’t engage in behaviour that increases the likelihood of being raped.

Arm yourself.

Men’s sexual activity? Social conservatives do not think much of men who don’t take personal responsibility for their children. They don’t think much of men who sleep around and spread STD’s and condoms don’t solve the problem.

Don’t want to please follow societal rules to please men? Then take personal responsibility for your behaviour and go against societal rules and don’t act like you’re a victim because people disapprove, you’re not entitled to people’s approval

Note, how personal responsibility diminishes victimhood.

Personal responsibility is not selfishness. It’s the opposite of selfishness.  

Personal responsibility saves lives.

JayEmJay, I admire your brave and steadfast pro-life stance in the face of so much opposition and, yes, hate thrown your way. However, I can’t abide or agree with a major part of this post. You said women should avoid behaviour that increases the likelihood of being raped. The commentary I am about to post is not meant to attack you or hate on you, but rather to educate you (kindly) so you won’t make those kind of hurtful or bad comments in the future.

By saying women should avoid behaviour that increases the likelihood of being raped, you’re placing the onus of avoiding rape on the victim of rape. This mindset leads to the mindset of, and this applies even if you never intended it, the victim of rape being responsible for the rape, rather than the rapist himself. Further, this mindset can and does and has caused harm in the past to rape victims/survivors. The Toronto Police Chief, a few years back, said that women should ‘stop dressing like sluts if they don’t want to get raped’. This is the Chief of Police. The rank and file cops on the beat and investigating crimes take their cue from him. Not to mention across the First World, women who take their rapists to trial have their sexual history dug up and paraded in front of the court room to make a case of “can we really be sure this was actually rape? Maybe she really wanted it, maybe she led him on, who can say! Look at her character! You can’t convict in the face of this!”

This is real. This is a huge, huge thing in feminism and is a huge source of (righteous) rage and indignation in the feminist movement. Now, you don’t have to consider yourself a feminist (and contrary to popular belief, you’re not a terrible person if you knowingly choose to not consider yourself in line with mainstream feminism, what with its stance on abortion and the like). But this view, this one particular view, that placing the onus on rape victims/survivors to avoid being raped ends with rape victims/survivors being blamed for their rape, is spot on and is a concrete reality.

Now, the person attacking you in this post I’m adding to has a lot of misplaced anger and, in my opinion, totally missed the point of your post (point being that men can suffer from abortion as well, not that men have it worse than women in everything, like this individual seemed to interpret your post as saying, which it didn’t). But when you say ‘personal responsibility’ is the answer to rape, you’re wrong. I’m saying this, as a Christian, lovingly - I am speaking the truth in love, with no abuse or slander or hate thrown your way. You are wrong, dead wrong, if you think the answer to rape is for women to try and avoid behaviors that ‘provoke’ rape or whatever. 

Now I honestly don’t believe you hate or despise women, I don’t. I personally think you just held an ignorant belief (and I do not mean to insult you - lots of people hold ignorant beliefs about lots of things, for a variety of factors and reasons) with no malicious intent. But this is a belief that is demonstrably harmful to women across the world, and I cannot sit here and let you persist in said belief without me lovingly challenging you on it.

Keep advocating for the rights of the unborn, but also please strongly reconsider your views on rape and women. Thanks :)

A mindset of personal responsibility does not blame the victim.

Who commits the crime? The perp.

Is rape ever justified? No.

But  there are times people do contribute to their own victimhood.

It’s true of rape, and of any kind of bad thing that can happen to a human being.

It does not make you responsible for the crime.

But realizing that you can harm your own self-interests with your behaviour helps. It’s empowering.

Examples are abundant. Suppose, for instance, I travel to an underprivileged and predominantly minority neighbourhood that had a lot of violent gang-related activity.

Now would not be a good time to use a lot of racist language. Because if you use a lot of racist language, especially when addressing others, you can expect a violent reaction.

Is a violent reaction to racist language okay? No, it’s not okay.

But is this violent reaction a foreseeable consequence of using racist language? Yes. 

So if you want to keep yourself safe in such a circumstance, don’t use racist language.

Telling people that does not absolve the aggressor of his crime.

It does not diminish the gravity of the crime.

But telling a visitor to such a neighbhood to do that will help keep them safe.

I lock the doors of my car. If someone breaks into my car, is it my fault? No. But a foreseeable consequence of not locking my doors is that people break into my car. It’s not fair that I can’t keep my doors unlocked, but if I lock them, I will keep my stuff safe.

The foreseeable consequence of hanging around horny men at a college party while drinking is sexual assault. This is not rocket science. It’s not blaming the victim for the act. It’s empowering women to let them know so that they avoid these kinds of situations.

So what do we do? Not tell women the truth about foreseeable consequences of their behaviour? Not tell women what to do to avoid rape? How is that loving? People are responsible to avoid negative foreseeable consequences. That’s what personal responsibility is. This is not some kind of conspiracy to keep women down. This is common sense. It applies to every situation and to every person. 

persephoneholly:

twocrowns:

persephoneholly:

twocrowns:

persephoneholly:

twocrowns:

Social Justice. #prolife #tcot #roft

You mean fetuses. How about you focus on the starving or the homeless. Y’know, people who need help.

Yeah I mean fetuses. Fetuses are human beings. 
Why do I focus on the unborn? Because they are the most vulnerable human beings of all.

Actually, they’re not. Why don’t you focus on people who are suffering and starving? Fetuses don’t actually need you, I promise.

Some fetuses do suffer from abortion, as some abortions are done past viability, when they are able to feel pain.
All organisms of our species are human beings. A fetus is an organism of our species. Therefore he is a human being. He is one of us.
A human being doesn’t have lesser value because he has not developed the ability to suffer. The equality of human beings means that no function can be the standard by which we judge one to be a valuable, and another not valuable.
This is what equality is:  to regard every human being as being like oneself.

Any abortion done passed viability is done because of medical emergencies, deformities, or health issues. Just because a fetus is human does not make it a person. Even if it was a person it has no rights to the body it’s occupying. Simple. Equal rights do not mean special rights.

The Gosnell criminal case showed that that’s a lie.
The women coming in for third trimester abortions were not there because their babies had genetic defects.
And I know for a fact that certain Canadian provinces send their elective late-term abortions to the United States for lack of doctors.
 And even if there were deformities, that’s no excuse to kill a human being. That’s ableist.
If you say that a human being is not a person, that’s discriminatory and against the principle of equality. The basis for human rights is the intrinsic dignity of human beings based on their shared rational nature. Every human being is ontologically equally: meaning there’s no one human better than another human being, regardless of any characteristics you can name. That’s the basis on which women, people of color, and disabled people are granted equal rights, and if chip away at that fundamental notion, then you chip away at the concept of equal rights, especially for the disabled, because the functionalist reasons invoked to deny the unborn their rights would eventually be used to deny the disabled. If only a certain level of awareness, consciousness, or mobility makes one a human being, then implicitly, many disabled people should not have rights.
The fetus does not have a right to a body; but he is entitled to his parents’ care, and he’s entitled to life. And even if the fetus occupies a uterus against the mother’s will, that’s still no justification to kill a baby, especially since the occupation is temporary and its end is foreseeable. Nobody has the right to kill a baby for occupying one’s property or for violating any other right. That’s obviously non-sense. The baby isn’t responsible for being there in the first place, and killing him is making him the scapegoat for actions he didn’t take.
There are no special rights being invoked here. But there is responsibility being invoked. Adults have responsibility for children, especially children they created.

persephoneholly:

twocrowns:

persephoneholly:

twocrowns:

persephoneholly:

twocrowns:

Social Justice. #prolife #tcot #roft

You mean fetuses. How about you focus on the starving or the homeless. Y’know, people who need help.

Yeah I mean fetuses. Fetuses are human beings. 

Why do I focus on the unborn? Because they are the most vulnerable human beings of all.

Actually, they’re not. Why don’t you focus on people who are suffering and starving? Fetuses don’t actually need you, I promise.

Some fetuses do suffer from abortion, as some abortions are done past viability, when they are able to feel pain.

All organisms of our species are human beings. A fetus is an organism of our species. Therefore he is a human being. He is one of us.

A human being doesn’t have lesser value because he has not developed the ability to suffer. The equality of human beings means that no function can be the standard by which we judge one to be a valuable, and another not valuable.

This is what equality is:  to regard every human being as being like oneself.

Any abortion done passed viability is done because of medical emergencies, deformities, or health issues. Just because a fetus is human does not make it a person. Even if it was a person it has no rights to the body it’s occupying. Simple. Equal rights do not mean special rights.

The Gosnell criminal case showed that that’s a lie.

The women coming in for third trimester abortions were not there because their babies had genetic defects.

And I know for a fact that certain Canadian provinces send their elective late-term abortions to the United States for lack of doctors.

 And even if there were deformities, that’s no excuse to kill a human being. That’s ableist.

If you say that a human being is not a person, that’s discriminatory and against the principle of equality. The basis for human rights is the intrinsic dignity of human beings based on their shared rational nature. Every human being is ontologically equally: meaning there’s no one human better than another human being, regardless of any characteristics you can name. That’s the basis on which women, people of color, and disabled people are granted equal rights, and if chip away at that fundamental notion, then you chip away at the concept of equal rights, especially for the disabled, because the functionalist reasons invoked to deny the unborn their rights would eventually be used to deny the disabled. If only a certain level of awareness, consciousness, or mobility makes one a human being, then implicitly, many disabled people should not have rights.

The fetus does not have a right to a body; but he is entitled to his parents’ care, and he’s entitled to life. And even if the fetus occupies a uterus against the mother’s will, that’s still no justification to kill a baby, especially since the occupation is temporary and its end is foreseeable. Nobody has the right to kill a baby for occupying one’s property or for violating any other right. That’s obviously non-sense. The baby isn’t responsible for being there in the first place, and killing him is making him the scapegoat for actions he didn’t take.

There are no special rights being invoked here. But there is responsibility being invoked. Adults have responsibility for children, especially children they created.

by-grace-of-god:

"This is no time to be ashamed of the Gospel. It is the time to preach it from the rooftops. Do not be afraid to break out of comfortable and routine modes of living in order to take up the challenge of making Christ known in the modern metropolis." ~ Pope John Paul II

by-grace-of-god:

"This is no time to be ashamed of the Gospel. It is the time to preach it from the rooftops. Do not be afraid to break out of comfortable and routine modes of living in order to take up the challenge of making Christ known in the modern metropolis." ~ Pope John Paul II

oh-snap-pro-choice:

twocrowns:

oh-snap-pro-choice:

twocrowns:

persephoneholly:

twocrowns:

Social Justice. #prolife #tcot #roft

You mean fetuses. How about you focus on the starving or the homeless. Y’know, people who need help.

Yeah I mean fetuses. Fetuses are human beings. 
Why do I focus on the unborn? Because they are the most vulnerable human beings of all.

Why do I focus on the unborn? Because potential humans mean more than actual sentient feeling people, who don’t deserve their rights if they had sex and fall pregnant. -Ash

A fetus is not a “potential human”.
As a member of our species, a fetus is a human being like everyone else.
Feelings, or other abilities that humans acquire in later stages of development do no make us superior.
All human beings are  equal, regardless of stage of development, age, or ability.

The ability to feel pain is incredibly important in the abortion debate. Pregnant people feel pain. They can suffer. Forced pregnancy is so traumatic that the UN has called it a form of torture. Foetuses cannot feel pain, are not sentient. By outlawing abortion you are telling pregnant people that the foetus in their body has the right to own their body. That they cannot dictate who uses their organs. How is that equal? -Ash

The ability to feel pain  does not determine the value of a human being.
Forced pregnancy may be traumatic, but abortion actually destroys a human being. Feelings and suffering can be healed, death cannot. That`s why the death of a human being is a greater evil than psychological suffering.
Fetuses don’t have a `right` to a body. What they are entitled to is the care and the love of their parents. Once you create life, you create the responsibility to take care of that life. It`s not the fetus dictating what you do with the body; it’s the circumstances that demand that parents take care of their children.
How is that equal? We are all entitled to the care of our parents as children. That’s how it’s equal.

oh-snap-pro-choice:

twocrowns:

oh-snap-pro-choice:

twocrowns:

persephoneholly:

twocrowns:

Social Justice. #prolife #tcot #roft

You mean fetuses. How about you focus on the starving or the homeless. Y’know, people who need help.

Yeah I mean fetuses. Fetuses are human beings. 

Why do I focus on the unborn? Because they are the most vulnerable human beings of all.

Why do I focus on the unborn?
Because potential humans mean more than actual sentient feeling people, who don’t deserve their rights if they had sex and fall pregnant.
-Ash

A fetus is not a “potential human”.

As a member of our species, a fetus is a human being like everyone else.

Feelings, or other abilities that humans acquire in later stages of development do no make us superior.

All human beings are  equal, regardless of stage of development, age, or ability.

The ability to feel pain is incredibly important in the abortion debate.
Pregnant people feel pain. They can suffer. Forced pregnancy is so traumatic that the UN has called it a form of torture. Foetuses cannot feel pain, are not sentient.
By outlawing abortion you are telling pregnant people that the foetus in their body has the right to own their body. That they cannot dictate who uses their organs. How is that equal?
-Ash

The ability to feel pain  does not determine the value of a human being.

Forced pregnancy may be traumatic, but abortion actually destroys a human being. Feelings and suffering can be healed, death cannot. That`s why the death of a human being is a greater evil than psychological suffering.

Fetuses don’t have a `right` to a body. What they are entitled to is the care and the love of their parents. Once you create life, you create the responsibility to take care of that life. It`s not the fetus dictating what you do with the body; it’s the circumstances that demand that parents take care of their children.

How is that equal? We are all entitled to the care of our parents as children. That’s how it’s equal.

Only trust in God can transform doubts into certainty, evil into good, night into radiant dawn.
Pope Francis, April 11, 2014, via Twitter (via popequotes)
oh-snap-pro-choice:

twocrowns:

persephoneholly:

twocrowns:

Social Justice. #prolife #tcot #roft

You mean fetuses. How about you focus on the starving or the homeless. Y’know, people who need help.

Yeah I mean fetuses. Fetuses are human beings. 
Why do I focus on the unborn? Because they are the most vulnerable human beings of all.

Why do I focus on the unborn? Because potential humans mean more than actual sentient feeling people, who don’t deserve their rights if they had sex and fall pregnant. -Ash

A fetus is not a “potential human”.
As a member of our species, a fetus is a human being like everyone else.
Feelings, or other abilities that humans acquire in later stages of development do no make us superior.
All human beings are  equal, regardless of stage of development, age, or ability.

oh-snap-pro-choice:

twocrowns:

persephoneholly:

twocrowns:

Social Justice. #prolife #tcot #roft

You mean fetuses. How about you focus on the starving or the homeless. Y’know, people who need help.

Yeah I mean fetuses. Fetuses are human beings. 

Why do I focus on the unborn? Because they are the most vulnerable human beings of all.

Why do I focus on the unborn?
Because potential humans mean more than actual sentient feeling people, who don’t deserve their rights if they had sex and fall pregnant.
-Ash

A fetus is not a “potential human”.

As a member of our species, a fetus is a human being like everyone else.

Feelings, or other abilities that humans acquire in later stages of development do no make us superior.

All human beings are  equal, regardless of stage of development, age, or ability.

persephoneholly:

twocrowns:

persephoneholly:

twocrowns:

Social Justice. #prolife #tcot #roft

You mean fetuses. How about you focus on the starving or the homeless. Y’know, people who need help.

Yeah I mean fetuses. Fetuses are human beings. 
Why do I focus on the unborn? Because they are the most vulnerable human beings of all.

Actually, they’re not. Why don’t you focus on people who are suffering and starving? Fetuses don’t actually need you, I promise.

Some fetuses do suffer from abortion, as some abortions are done past viability, when they are able to feel pain.
All organisms of our species are human beings. A fetus is an organism of our species. Therefore he is a human being. He is one of us.
A human being doesn’t have lesser value because he has not developed the ability to suffer. The equality of human beings means that no function can be the standard by which we judge one to be a valuable, and another not valuable.
This is what equality is:  to regard every human being as being like oneself.

persephoneholly:

twocrowns:

persephoneholly:

twocrowns:

Social Justice. #prolife #tcot #roft

You mean fetuses. How about you focus on the starving or the homeless. Y’know, people who need help.

Yeah I mean fetuses. Fetuses are human beings. 

Why do I focus on the unborn? Because they are the most vulnerable human beings of all.

Actually, they’re not. Why don’t you focus on people who are suffering and starving? Fetuses don’t actually need you, I promise.

Some fetuses do suffer from abortion, as some abortions are done past viability, when they are able to feel pain.

All organisms of our species are human beings. A fetus is an organism of our species. Therefore he is a human being. He is one of us.

A human being doesn’t have lesser value because he has not developed the ability to suffer. The equality of human beings means that no function can be the standard by which we judge one to be a valuable, and another not valuable.

This is what equality is:  to regard every human being as being like oneself.

dogetalpapist:

Nothing about God or His Church, of course, because who are we even kidding anymore?

He speaks very often about God and his Church. 

Dear Hollywood

patron-saint-of-smart-asses:

Christians are not either naive and innocent or evil and oppressive.

Work on your character development, yo

I'm pro life and I just wanted to say I'm glad you're teaching pro-choices why we feel this way and saying it in a civilized, mature way. Both aides of the abortion argument act very immaturely sometimes

anti-abortion:

I completely agree. It’s entirely disheartening when I see people on both sides of the issue act that way. I appreciate your kind sentiments, thank you bud!

When you keep to facts and logic, and never attack, you have the high ground. Always.