Feel free to share the link.
What really tears me is that these oh-so-righteous people won't fund any research toward things that could actually help in these terrible situations, like efforts to artificially replicate the uterine environment (and in many cases actually oppose such technologies). If they really cared about saving lives like they claim, they'd be giving funding on the level of the Manhattan Project to developing the technology so that nobody has to watch their baby die because they couldn't sustain the pregnancy long enough for them to live on their own. Which indicates to me that it's not really about saving babies, but about woman as vessel instead of person.
(This is a personal sore spot for me, even though I know intellectually that the technology wouldn't have saved my sister-in-law's third kid for the simple reason that by the time my sister-in-law had any sign something had gone wrong, the placenta had already failed and the poor little mite had already died).
It's very clearly about controlling women-as-vessels, not about promoting/preserving/assisting lives.
In the case of the GOP, I see it as a cheap-grace approach: by attacking abortion, they are also saving money (taxpayer money) by not allowing money to be spent on them. They can wave their arms and shed crocodile tears about the poor little innocent unborn--no dollar cost there--while ignoring the needs of those already born, because it would cost money to do anything to help them. We have 16 to 18 MILLION children below the poverty level in this country, mostly due to their parents being out of work, or a serious medical problem in the family...we have kids living in cars, on the street, in homeless shelters, going to school hungry, going to sleep hungry, without medical care, without the glasses they need to see or the hearing aids they need to hear...but that doesn't soften the hearts or open the pocketbooks of the right-to-lifers. They save their pity for those it costs nothing to pity.
I lived in a car once with my parents… not so fun… was below the line a handful of times, and barely above it the rest, so I can sympathize with them. Though I suppose I technically had it better than others.
As a guy who strongly prefers females (because I find most other males insufferable) I seriously find sexism the single most maddening thing ever. I can put up with quite a bit, but marginalizing women, and by extension, my closest and most valued friends, is a guaranteed way to gain my eternal ire.
I’ll never quite understand how, as a species, we went from deifying women and worshiping primarily female gods, to denigrating them to weak, frail little creatures that need a man to do everything for them. Completely ignoring the fact there are plenty of women who are anything but weak. The reason I prefer strong female leads is because I know females who could very probably kill me if provoked, and I dare anyone to tell them, to their face, what to do with their bodies. No, really, I’d love to see the outcome of that.
That fact that we’re STILL dealing with these archaic issues in this nation is abhorrently depressing, for a people who purportedly love freedom and liberty so much, we seem highly conservative as to the nature of the freedom given, extending only to a small segment of men (who all seem to have been raised by the same person… I posit Echidna.)
It wasn’t even until extremely recently that we started to seriously consider allowing females into active combat positions in our military… (Disclaimer: I am not a member of any military service) Maybe I’m in the minority, but I’d rather have a woman as my wing[wo]man and or cover/backup in any type of combat. And to anyone who claims women aren’t good soldiers, I have one thing to say: Lyudmila Mykhailivna Pavlichenko, 309 kills. Show me a single modern male soldier with a better record then hers (Bombers and heavy artillery don't count).
Well said, Elizabeth!! The fact that these breaches of basic freedoms and personal rights to choice are allowed to continue are angering and frustrating!! "Awareness" -- "Human rights" -- "Freedom"? We have a long way to go yet.
I assume that since preserving LIFE!!! is so important to these pols, they also support forced kidney donations, bone marrow donations, etc. After all, those save LIVES!
And what if the person who had a kidney someone else needed was on welfare, and the person needing it was rich? Isn't the rich guy "more valuable"? Would it not be worth it to force the less-valuable person to suffer risk of death, pain, and serious bodily intervention to possibly save the more-valuable???
So there's even more reason, in some sense, to mandate forced organ donations etc. than forced pregnancies; after all, that fetus may never amount to anything, unlike someone needy with PROVED WORTH.
Note that i do not actually support any of this. I think the state should keep its paws off everyone's innards. BUT: if it's OK to force women to undergo expensive, painful, risky medical procedures for the sole benefit of someone else... well, I think that could easily be extended. Even *gasp* to MEN.