Politics : 13 year old: "I could be a criminal for not wanting to have my rapist's child."

Dawn Hennessey said she was going to cry.

“Honestly, I’m just in shock," Hennessey, who owns a bakery in South Austin, said. "I’m appalled. It’s a setback. We’re gonna have an underground railroad next thing you know. It’s horrifying.”

Austinites stopped on the street by a reporter Friday expressed disbelief and alarm at news of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, the landmark ruling that has for decades upheld the right of people to seek an abortion. The high court’s ruling now leaves it to states to decide whether to restrict the procedure.

Later in the afternoon, hundreds gathered at the federal courthouse downtown, preparing to march to the Capitol.

"I could be a criminal for getting an abortion," said 13-year-old Vienna, whose mother would not let her give her last name out of safety concerns. "I could be a criminal for saving my own life … and I could be a criminal for not wanting to have my rapist's child."

During the march to the Capitol, the crowd chanted, "Abortion is health care" and "Abort Greg Abbott."

"I've had a lifetime of [access to] abortions and these young people won't," Kitty Fowler, 66, said.

Val Rodriguez, 28, said she had no words when she first heard the news; she just felt anger.

"I've always had to be cautious as a woman," she said, "more so now."

Tavy Edwards, 20, held a sign that said, "We are not incubators." They said their mom had a lot of complications during pregnancy and if she had not had access to abortion she could have died.

"It's our fundamental right. … It's an attack on our human rights," the Texas State University student said. "If I'm in relationships with people who have penises, if I want to have sex with them … it changes how I conduct the entirety of my life."

Providers in Texas said they would stop offering abortions immediately while they figure out if anti-abortion laws in effect before Roe now apply.

"Right now, we need people who understand law and can analyze what the interaction between the SCOTUS ruling today and the existing — very old — laws mean for us," Jeffrey Hons, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of South Texas, said at a press conference.

Attorney General Ken Paxton has said that anti-abortion laws pre-dating Roe are indeed in effect. “Under these pre-Roe statutes, abortion providers could be criminally liable for providing abortions starting today," he wrote.

"It's our fundamental right. … It's an attack on our human rights," the Texas State University student said. "If I'm in relationships with people who have penises, if I want to have sex with them … it changes how I conduct the entirety of my life."

How burdensome!

---

If we take the time to see with the heart and not with the mind, we shall see that we are surrounded completely by angels ~ Carlos Santana

while I am pro-choice regarding abortion, there is also the choice to keep one’s legs closed as well.

---

Norman! What did you put in my tea?

Oral until after menopause

---

If we take the time to see with the heart and not with the mind, we shall see that we are surrounded completely by angels ~ Carlos Santana

Cheeky’s birth control method…

---

Norman! What did you put in my tea?

---

If we take the time to see with the heart and not with the mind, we shall see that we are surrounded completely by angels ~ Carlos Santana

Too bad your mother never kept hers closed, piece of chit

Too bad you weren’t aborted, pos.

---

Norman! What did you put in my tea?

Birth control. It's available all over the place.

Therefore, for instance, if a woman who was not on birth control and was trying to conceive from their partner, was impregnated by some rapist, they should have to have their baby. Nice one! 🖕

---

Just because I'm not on THEIR side, doesn't mean I'm on YOURS.

Move to California

---

Pro-choicers use more placeholders for abortion than any group does with any other political issue.

I could be a criminal for not wanting to have my rapist's child."

No, it's not a crime to not want anyone's child. Otherwise all stepdads would go to prison.

The correct way to word this is, "I could be a criminal for killing my rapist's child."

Even then, totally not a crime if child is still unborn.

What irks me about pro-choicers is they will use these deranged placeholders because they don't want to say "kill" or "terminate" or "abort."

They will replace that with "..reproductive health, their own bodies," etc. It's irritating. The fact that they rely on placeholders should give them a hint that their conscious is rejecting the literal meaning.

No one uses placeholders for gay marriage. If someone supports sex-marriage marriage, they will actively tell you, "I support same-sex marriage." No one changes this to, "I support a man's decision to marry who he wants with his own body" or "I support a man's non-reproductive sexual acts." They will literally tell you, I SUPPORT SAME-SEX MARRIAGE.

Abortion is the only issue where it's supports in public do not say the literal thing "I SUPPORT THE REMOVAL/TERMINATION OF A FOETUS."

---

Never lose your desire.

What is the mental disorder you have been diagnosed with? It would have cured you if you had been aborted.

---

Norman! What did you put in my tea?

The fact that they rely on placeholders should give them a hint that their conscious is rejecting the literal meaning.

The fact that anti-choicers don't hold funerals for miscarriages or sign up fetuses for citizenship immediately upon learning they are pregnant should give us a hint that they understand, deep down, that a fetus isn't a person and does not carry the same moral weight as a born human being.

The fact that anti-choicers don't hold funerals for miscarriages

They often do. I've been to them. The casket was the size of a shoe box. It's quite common.

sign up fetuses for citizenship immediately

By this reasoning, illegal immigrants and African Americans circa Dredd Scott era. Paperwork doesn't define nature.

that a fetus isn't a person and does not carry the same moral weight as a born human being.

I can't understand for the life of me how pro-abortionists differentiate between the two if time is the only factor separating them. Whatever you consider a "human being," you know that if you leave a zygote alone, he/she will eventually grow into that. That means they are the same. And, it's already an individual: if the mother aborts, then gets pregnant again later, has the baby, that baby will look different than the aborted one would have looked. Each aborted fetus has their own DNA code that determines hair colour, eye colour, Jew nose, etc. It's a human and it's right there in front of you. How can you not see this? Because of TIME?

Anyway, that's a opinion of moral relativism: when deciding to kill someone, when that being cannot consent to his/her own death, we must only base this decision on objective, factual criteria. It's too crucial of a decision to risk being wrong.

Since people cannot be 100% sure that a zygote "matters" according to the universe, we must err on the side of assumption that it is. It's better to not kill and be right than kill and be wrong.
'

---

Never lose your desire.

They often do. I've been to them. The casket was the size of a shoe box. It's quite common.

Complete and utter bullshit. You are just making stuff up.

I can't understand for the life of me how pro-abortionists differentiate between the two if time is the only factor separating them.

Deranged, stupid people who make **** up often don't understand how normal, sane people reason.

The major deciding factor for the rest of us is that the fetus is part of the woman's body and depends on sucking resources out of that body to grow, just like a tumor.

It's too crucial of a decision to risk being wrong.

There is no such thing as being objectively wrong in such cases, so let's side with how sane, rational people think and let women control their own bodies.

Complete and utter bullshit. You are just making stuff up.

I'm more sad for you that from your life experiences you don't know this is a common thing. People actually do have funerals for miscarriages. Especially, during the third trimester. It's a thing.

There is no such thing as being objectively wrong in such cases

Sure there is. There's an objective answer to everything, but humans are limited in universal knowledge.

If there were a Master or the Universe controlling the strings, here, they know the exact moment at which the child becomes valued and counts. It could be conception; it could be 358233 hours into it; humans do not know the answer to this *objectively*. So you have to err on the side of caution that humans matter during all stages of the lifespan.

Deranged, stupid people who make **** up often don't understand how normal, sane people reason.

The major deciding factor for the rest of us is that the fetus is part of the woman's body and depends on sucking resources out of that body to grow, just like a tumor.

It's a federal crime to damage a certain species of turtle's egg and an Eagle's egg. The reasoning is turtles and eagles are endangered.

According to pro-abortion logic, the eggs are not turtles nor eagles. Therefore it should not be a federal crime to damage them, as they are just clumps of cells, and are neither turtles nor eagles.

This is not a extreme position. Human life matters regardless of race, ethnicity, age, ability. This is basic default position that any sane, reasonable person would have. This is not a conservative position any more than being anti-slavery is a conservative position. It's a human rights position.

Pro-choicers like you are just heavily brainwashed by what you see other leftists talking about in the media. A whole group of media convinced you that killing humans is ok under a certain point because you happen to like the other views they have.

---

Never lose your desire.

People actually do have funerals for miscarriages. Especially, during the third trimester. It's a thing.

Are you conflating the 2 now, abortions and miscarriages. A miscarriage is nature's way of aborting, yet the mother would have wanted the child. We are discussing abortions and those that DON'T choose to have the child. A third trimester, even second, abortion would be rare and 99.9% of the time would be performed for health concerns/risks for the mother.

You truly are one of the most moronic creeps this board has witnessed. What matters first is the human life of those ALREADY sentient and an unbirthed fetus doesn't technically become human until birthed and breathing air.

---

Norman! What did you put in my tea?

People actually do have funerals for miscarriages. Especially, during the third trimester. It's a thing.

You are either a completely delusional nutcase or an utterly unconvincing liar. Take your pick.

Sure there is. There's an objective answer to everything, but humans are limited in universal knowledge.

Wrong. This statement is the height of naive ignorance. As I've said before, it is pretty obvious that you have never studied philosophy and have no idea what you are talking about.

If there were a Master or the Universe controlling the strings, here, they know the exact moment at which the child becomes valued and counts.

Wrong. There is no such moment and no amount of observations of objective, verifiable facts will support any claim that such a moment has been reached.

According to pro-abortion logic, the eggs are not turtles nor eagles. Therefore it should not be a federal crime to damage them, as they are just clumps of cells, and are neither turtles nor eagles.

You know you are losing the argument when you have to resort to the utterly pathetic tactic of making up arguments that no pro-abortion advocate has ever made in the history of Earth.

I gave you our position. Deal with it or shut the **** up, moron.

1.

People actually do have funerals for miscarriages. Especially, during the third trimester. It's a thing.

You are either a completely delusional nutcase or an utterly unconvincing liar. Take your pick.

Wrong. This is quite sad; it just shows how far you are removed from reality, and that you weren't raised with this. You not being familiar that miscarriage funerals were a custom is like an old guy from rural West Virginia going to NYC and discovering black people in person for the first time. This is especially common among Catholics.

Wrong. There is no such moment and no amount of observations of objective, verifiable facts will support any claim that such a moment has been reached.

Are you seriously batshit retarded?

THAT'S THE POINT, Beavis. Since humans cannot determine this "point" conclusively and unanimously when a human is awarded his/her "human rights" then you to err on the side of caution that they always matter.

Otherwise, you're supporting the killing of someone solely based on your belief that it's not a human being who matters yet. You can't kill someone based on your stupid opinions and beliefs.

http://ticker.mesonet.org/archive/20140611/dude.jpg

---

Never lose your desire.

You not being familiar that miscarriage funerals were a custom is like an old guy from rural West Virginia going to NYC and discovering black people in person for the first time.

Again, you are a delusional nutcase or a liar.

Funerals for miscarriages have never, ever been a thing. I'm not denying that a tiny, meaningless group of people have done a few of them, just that it is

A] Extremely rare and eccentric behavior;

B] If you crazy people actually believed fetuses were as valuable as born humans, ALL of you would have funerals, every time. And you'd engage in a number of other behaviors demonstrating this belief, too. But for the most part, you people don't. Which just shows us that deep down, you KNOW you are utterly and completely full of ****.

Are you seriously batshit retarded?

No, that's you. And I'm about to slowly explain why to you using short words even an uneducated buffoon like you has a chance of understanding.

Since humans cannot determine this "point" conclusively and unanimously when a human is awarded his/her "human rights". . .

Here is where you make a basic mistake in logic. You are "begging the question". That is, you are assuming as true the very thing you are being challenged to prove.

It isn't enough for you to declare that this "point" is a mystery beyond human comprehension and that therefore we should "err on the side of caution".

You need to prove that this point even exists in the first place.

I say this point does not exist. The vast majority of philosophers alive today agree with me and would argue that you are completely full of ****.

So what's you argument? Prove that this point exists or shut the **** up with your dumb ass ideology which most civilized countries rejected long ago.

---

"Normal is an illusion. What is normal for the spider, is chaos for the fly." - Morticia Addams

Oh look, a ******.

Aborting a baby from rape is a crime in most of the states that have banned abortion. There's no exception for rape.

---

My password is password

There shouldn't be. It's not the kid's fault. How heartless when mother's say "I don't want to carry my rapist's child" - yeah let's blame Junior because his dad's an asshole. That's so cruel to kill your own offspring because his dad's a rapist.

"Come er', Junior! Your deadbeat dad didn't pay child support, Imma gonna eat your brains!"

---

Never lose your desire.

my rapist's child

First off good on her for acknowledging that it is in fact a child. This person has not yet reached that step were they dehumanize to make the murder easier. However, should that rape occur then it is HER child as well.

---

I would agree with you but then both of us would be wrong

It's a fetus. It's a child after it's born, and keeping that born child after being raped and impregnated, then forced to birth it when you never consented to the act in the first place, is disgusting. Trying to validate making choices for women, especially when you're not one, especially when it's the body of someone whose choices do not affect you, is disgusting.

A girl or woman who is raped endures PTSD from the trauma, and forcing this on her only further traumatizes her. But these so-called "pro-lifers" don't care a bit once that fetus is born and a child emerges; they don't care about the responsibilities of the woman's mental health, physical health, financial stability, emotional sanity, or actual ability much less desire for a reminder that she was raped.

How about mandatory vasectomies for young boys instead since those can be reversed.

---

"Normal is an illusion. What is normal for the spider, is chaos for the fly." - Morticia Addams

Soul_Venom is the one dehumanizing people. He doesn't care at all about the lives of rape victims. He doesn't even see them as people.

---

My password is password

Of course I see them as people. I just don't care for people in general.

Imagine it as if we were talking about speed limits on the highway.
Your position is that there is no such thing as speed limits.
My position is that there ARE speed limits.
You argue that the fact that I regularly exceed those limits is proof that they don't exist.
I counter that the fact that I don't care enough to obey said limits does not erase the fact that they technically exist.

---

I would agree with you but then both of us would be wrong

Trying to validate making choices for women, especially when you're not one, especially when it's the body of someone whose choices do not affect you, is disgusting.

Soul Venom is disgusting and has not developed a soul.

---

Norman! What did you put in my tea?

I don't even care about the semantic arguments about whether it's a child or not. It can be an innocent human child. Still wouldn't have a right to a woman's body.

---

ᴳᵒ ᶠᵘᶜᵏ ʸᵒᵘʳˢᵉˡᶠ

innocent human child

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Note which of those 3 rights come first. They were not listed in that order just because they sounded good fool. You don't kill human beings just because they happen to be inconvenient.

---

I would agree with you but then both of us would be wrong

We made that **** up. Also, that **** has always been hypocritical.

No one should be able to violate one's body autonomy. Yeetus the fetus.

---

ᴳᵒ ᶠᵘᶜᵏ ʸᵒᵘʳˢᵉˡᶠ

No one should be able to violate one's body autonomy.

LOL.

Is that REALLY your argument for violating the unborn persons bodily autonomy?

---

I would agree with you but then both of us would be wrong

A fetus has no autonomy. It's a parasite id it's unwanted.

---

ᴳᵒ ᶠᵘᶜᵏ ʸᵒᵘʳˢᵉˡᶠ

It's a parasite id it's unwanted.

I am going to assume you meant if.
Since when was humanity arbitrary? Whether wanted or unwanted a person is a person regardless of subjective judgement.

---

I would agree with you but then both of us would be wrong

When that human violates one's autonomy. Pregnancy also comes with risks, especially a girl who just started getting periods.

What we consider a person is very subjective. Only in the last 100 years have most people considered black people as people with the same rights as us… and really, not even 100. Less than that.

---

ᴳᵒ ᶠᵘᶜᵏ ʸᵒᵘʳˢᵉˡᶠ

Only in the last 100 years have most people considered black people as people with the same rights as us…

And that was bullshit too. Not all that surprising considering it was another democRAT special.

As for risks I support abortion in the rare cases where the life of the mother is at stake.

---

I would agree with you but then both of us would be wrong

You idiots always say that **** as if the parties weren't completely different than what they are today. Also,you ****brains always assume anyone against the right is a Dem. I hate Dems.

Yeah, and I support them having a right to their own bodies regardless. I mean, you don't really have to kill them. Just remove them from the womb. If they don't live, it's an act of God or nature.

---

ᴳᵒ ᶠᵘᶜᵏ ʸᵒᵘʳˢᵉˡᶠ

Just remove them

≠

it's an act of God or nature.

---

I would agree with you but then both of us would be wrong

The outcome of whether they live or die is. All the woman is doing is taking it from her body.

---

ᴳᵒ ᶠᵘᶜᵏ ʸᵒᵘʳˢᵉˡᶠ

A location argument then.

So by your logic if I push you in front of a bus it is Gods will whether you live or die. I merely removed you from the sidewalk.

People as dumb as you elected people like AOC.

---

I would agree with you but then both of us would be wrong

Soul_Venom said... A location argument then.

So by your logic if I push you in front of a bus it is Gods will whether you live or die. I merely removed you from the sidewalk.

People as dumb as you elected people like AOC.

expand

It's more like if I used your blood for transfusions to stay alive. You would not be wrong to remove me.

---

ᴳᵒ ᶠᵘᶜᵏ ʸᵒᵘʳˢᵉˡᶠ

138 said... It's more like if I used your blood for transfusions to stay alive. You would not be wrong to remove me.

expand

All I can say about your logic is that your account handle suits you.

---

I would agree with you but then both of us would be wrong

Soul_Venom said... All I can say about your logic is that your account handle suits you.

expand

Notice how you made no actual argunent again.

---

ᴳᵒ ᶠᵘᶜᵏ ʸᵒᵘʳˢᵉˡᶠ

138 said... Notice how you made no actual argunent again.

expand

Notice how you changed your account handle but not your personality.

---

I would agree with you but then both of us would be wrong

No one should be able to violate one's body autonomy.

Ok then nobody should force me to wear a mask or vaccinate. Fair is fair.

Your refusal puts other autonomous individuals at risk. If it just affected you, then go ahead, but… do you knownhow viruses work?

Of course I don't expect you ****brains to have common sense. Also, no one is forcing you to. There is no criminal charge you can get. Now businesses in your beloved capitalist society do have the right to kick you out if you don't, and you shouldn't be a Karen about it.

---

ᴳᵒ ᶠᵘᶜᵏ ʸᵒᵘʳˢᵉˡᶠ

Your refusal puts other autonomous individuals at risk. If it just affected you, then go ahead, but… do you knownhow viruses work?

Of course I don't expect you ****brains to have common sense. Also, no one is forcing you to. There is no criminal charge you can get. Now businesses in your beloved capitalist society do have the right to kick you out if you don't, and you shouldn't be a Karen about it.

I love how the libtards are all of the sudden armchair doctors and scientists when it comes to the hoax virus but in reality are nothing but a bunch of science posers that only believe in Dr. Fauci NWO science instead of real science.

Where's your proof that I'm putting people at risk? Unless you have a ****ing DNA test linking me to "infecting others" you don't have ****. Do you know how natural immunity and common sense works? Of course not because you're a libtard so that was a redundant question.

Funny how you support "business rights" when it suits your agenda yet I'll bet you're the one crying and acting like a Karen when a Christian baker refuses service to a homosexual couple.

I'm a dirty commie, not a lib.

Dude, my dad died from it. I had it. It's not a hoax. Tons of evidence is there and most doctors agree on this and the things to prevent it.

Do you want me to explain pathogens to you? What is keeping you from googling? Why should I do your homework when you're just hoing to make up some excuse, maybe insult me, etc?

When did I ever deny natural immunity through infection being a thing? Though, there are reinfections, and a lot of people needlessly die before they can get this immunity. And how long will it last?

I don't support business rights, but I thought you did. You're inconsistent.

---

ᴳᵒ ᶠᵘᶜᵏ ʸᵒᵘʳˢᵉˡᶠ