Maybe they just get those Velcro closures. But who buys them?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Speaking of \u2026 one of theKid\u2019s teammates at a fairly-recent sporting display had to have Mom tie this kid\u2019s shoes. Now, this kid was within the same age realm as theKid \u2026 too old for diapers, not quite tween \u2026 and yet had absolutely no shame in letting Mom handle those laces.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Which begs the question: who cares for the child Mom didn\u2019t want, or just wasn\u2019t prepared for?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Proof pudding anti-choicer brigade cares nothing about the after born, only outrage at the idea that a woman (not a birthing\/menstruating person, but Womb-man, pronounced kind of like \u201cdebt\u201d) would terminate a pregnancy \u2026 usually for convenience, but other times for survival.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Methinks they should just declare that a woman has less value than the contents of her womb.
Just be blunt.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Be honest.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Oh\u2014wait. That would require moral integrity, which is sorely lacking in that sphere.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Not saying that pro-choice folks are any better, but at least they recognize the right to bodily autonomy, and don\u2019t consider women to be vessels first, humans last.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
There\u2019s a woman in Ohio who miscarried at 15 weeks, passed the almost-baby along with lots of blood, stool, and other bodily ick into the toilet, which clogged. She cleaned out the clog, left the remnants in a bucket outside near her garage, then went to the hospital.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The nurse helping to treat her called the cops. After losing her pregnancy\/baby, she\u2019s now charged with abuse of a corpse, like she robbed a grave and fornicated with the dead body. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
The fact that necrophilia is even a word is disturbing. People gonna people.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Way to Hippocratic oath there, sweetheart. Or maybe that only applies to doctors. Anyhoo, overall trust in the medical profession is dropping precipitously \u2026 kinda like with the Supremes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Fun fact: the lawyer that argued for the Supremes\u2019 ruling in Dobbs? The one that started this mess (literal, figurative, and legal)? Once clerked for Clarey Tom. Also, Clarey Tom and his former clerk attended a social event before the Dobbs case was argued before the Supremes \u2026 hmmm. No recusal? No conflict there, right? Sigh. Term limits? Anyone? Anyone? [crickets] I digress<\/p>\n\n\n\n
And the Texas resident who got a yes then a no to abort what would never become a positive, productive member of society, reduce the likelihood of complications and preserve her fertility? Yah, she had to \u201cflee\u201d to another state to get medical care \u2026 like she was a runaway under Art 4, section 2, clause 3. Ahh, \u2018Murrica.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Rethuglicans that inflicted this harm on pregnant women (yes, women<\/em>) all over the country need to be ashamed of themselves \u2026 but oh that\u2019s right they have no shame. {Jeremiah 5:28<\/em>}<\/p>\n\n\n\n And no courage. They\u2019ll hide behind the laws they passed when confronted about the negative effects. It\u2019s easy to beat up on girls<\/em>. After all, they\u2019re the only ones seeking abortions in the first place.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Inserting politics into a medical procedure? Yah, see how that\u2019s working out \u2026 \u201cleave it to the states\u201d oh\u2014wait it\u2019s back before the Supremes \u2026 who started this mess (literal, figurative, and legal) for women to navigate on their own.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Why has no one argued the 13th<\/sup> amendment protects against abortion restrictions? <\/p>\n\n\n\n Being forced to remain pregnant by operation of state law seems to fit the definition of \u201cbeing held at service or labour\u201d without being convicted of a crime so why are pro-choice lawyers silent on this? Interesting \u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n Even though Mississippi didn\u2019t vote to ratify until 1995, the 13th<\/sup> Amendment is still the law of the land, at least for now. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Seems that the legal jurisprudence owes a debt to women to get this one right. <\/p>\n\n\n\n But prolly not. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Latest salvo? Get the executive branch to administer away the right not to be pregnant. Nice.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Maybe they just get those Velcro closures. But who buys them? Speaking of \u2026 one of theKid\u2019s teammates at a fairly-recent sporting display had to have Mom tie this kid\u2019s shoes. Now, this kid was within the same age realm as theKid \u2026 too old for diapers, not quite tween \u2026 and yet had absolutely … <\/p>\n