Burn the Patriarchy

 

Mo hates women

 MO bill hb126 is the bill.

MO states that conception begins at fertilization - making IUDs, plan B, and some hormonal based contraceptives. This will impact IVF as some doctors have already made public statements to their clients that they will only be implanting one fertilized egg at a time.

Preforming an abortion (this goes for doctors and women who induce abortions via a pill or any other method) is now a class B felony with 5-15 years imprisonment. It goes even for women who get a pill in any way. If you have any part of inducing an abortion, you can be punished. However, this does not include for a person who has an abortion preformed upon (say you go to a doctor and get an abortion- only the doctor would be punished).

THIS IS BIG FOR ANYONE WHO IS PREGNANT PLEASE READ THIS SECTION: MO states that the burden of proof to prove that you did not have an abortion will be on YOU. Keep in mind, many abortion pills are indistinguishable from miscarriages. THIS MEANS THAT IF YOU HAVE A MISCARRIAGE YOU CAN BE PUNISHED WITH THE FULL EXTENT OF THE LAW!!! For those who don’t know: you can’t control if your body has a miscarriage. It’s a completely natural process that cannot be controlled.

Before preforming an abortion, even in the case of miscarriage, the physician must evaluate heart and brain activity. This means that, even if the fetus is dead, if there is any electrical impulse an abortion cannot be preformed unless any of the exceptions stated below.

Exceptions to the law:

• if the pregnant person is at imminent risk of death or loosing a major bodily function. This does not include an ectopic pregnancy as you aren’t at risk of death or loss of bodily function until after your tube ruptures.

Trust the women

 Almost three years ago, in an interview with Fox News anchor Chris Wallace, former United States Presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg fielded common conservative talking points on abortion rights. Instead of taking the bait, he had the perfect response to pro-lifers. He reiterated an individual's right to make the decision to carry her pregnancy to term or not. In addition to this, Buttigieg urged Wallace and other conservatives to not "get caught up in hypotheticals," Vox News reports. At a time when abortion rights have once again come under fire across the country, his arguments are an important foundation to understand why those who can actually receive abortions are, first and foremost, the top authorities on the subject.

During the interview, Wallace pressed Buttigieg for an answer on when he believed the "cutoff point" should be for someone seeking to have an abortion. He asked, "Do you believe, at any point in pregnancy, that there should be any limit on a woman’s right to an abortion?" This has been a framing popularly used by pro-life activists to suggest that there is a preponderance of individuals opting to have abortions very late in their pregnancies—which the former Mayor of South Bend, Indiana, effectively proved was simply not true.

"The dialogue has gotten so caught up in where you draw the line," he responded. "I trust women to draw the line." Unsatisfied with his response, the news anchor swiftly followed up: "You would be okay with a woman well into the third trimester to obtain an abortion?" Buttigieg thus noted that such hypotheticals are typically set up to "provoke a strong emotional reaction Almost three years ago, in an interview with Fox News anchor Chris Wallace, former United States Presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg fielded common conservative talking points on abortion rights. Instead of taking the bait, he had the perfect response to pro-lifers. He reiterated an individual's right to make the decision to carry her pregnancy to term or not. In addition to this, Buttigieg urged Wallace and other conservatives to not "get caught up in hypotheticals," Vox News reports. At a time when abortion rights have once again come under fire across the country, his arguments are an important foundation to understand why those who can actually receive abortions are, first and foremost, the top authorities on the subject.

During the interview, Wallace pressed Buttigieg for an answer on when he believed the "cutoff point" should be for someone seeking to have an abortion. He asked, "Do you believe, at any point in pregnancy, that there should be any limit on a woman’s right to an abortion?" This has been a framing popularly used by pro-life activists to suggest that there is a preponderance of individuals opting to have abortions very late in their pregnancies—which the former Mayor of South Bend, Indiana, effectively proved was simply not true.

"The dialogue has gotten so caught up in where you draw the line," he responded. "I trust women to draw the line." Unsatisfied with his response, the news anchor swiftly followed up: "You would be okay with a woman well into the third trimester to obtain an abortion?" Buttigieg thus noted that such hypotheticals are typically set up to "provoke a strong emotional reaction," prompting Wallace to share that there are 6,000 women a year who get an abortion in the third trimester. However, as the Democrat correctly replied, such cases comprise less than one percent of all abortion procedures completed in a year.

"So let us put ourselves in the shoes of a woman in that situation," Buttigieg went on to explain. "If it is that late in your pregnancy, then almost by definition, you have been expecting to carry it to term. We are talking about women who have perhaps chosen a name. Women who have purchased a crib. Families that then get the most devastating medical news of their lifetimes, something about the health or the life of the mother or the viability of the pregnancy that forces them to make an impossible, unthinkable choice."

He continued, affirming, "And the bottom line is, as horrible as that choice is, that women, that family, may seek spiritual guidance, they may seek medical guidance, but that decision is not going to be made any better, medically or morally, because the government is dictating how that decision should be made." While the comments were made almost three years ago, they are an important reminder for Americans today as the country once again battles with protecting abortion rights. Just this week, the Senate failed to advance a bill developed by members of the Democratic Party that would enshrine abortion rights in federal law. All 50 Republican senators—and Democratic Senator Joe Manchin—opposed the bill.," prompting Wallace to share that there are 6,000 women a year who get an abortion in the third trimester. However, as the Democrat correctly replied, such cases comprise less than one percent of all abortion procedures completed in a year.

"So let us put ourselves in the shoes of a woman in that situation," Buttigieg went on to explain. "If it is that late in your pregnancy, then almost by definition, you have been expecting to carry it to term. We are talking about women who have perhaps chosen a name. Women who have purchased a crib. Families that then get the most devastating medical news of their lifetimes, something about the health or the life of the mother or the viability of the pregnancy that forces them to make an impossible, unthinkable choice."

He continued, affirming, "And the bottom line is, as horrible as that choice is, that women, that family, may seek spiritual guidance, they may seek medical guidance, but that decision is not going to be made any better, medically or morally, because the government is dictating how that decision should be made." While the comments were made almost three years ago, they are an important reminder for Americans today as the country once again battles with protecting abortion rights. Just this week, the Senate failed to advance a bill developed by members of the Democratic Party that would enshrine abortion rights in federal law. All 50 Republican senators—and Democratic Senator Joe Manchin—opposed the bill.

The unborn are a convenient group of people to advocate for, unlike the living who need real help

 The unborn are a convenient group of people to advocate for.

They never make demands of you; they are morally uncomplicated, unlike the incarcerated, addicted, or the chronically poor; they don't resent your condescension or complain that you are not politically correct; unlike widows, they don't ask you to question patriarchy; unlike orphans, they don't need money, education, or childcare; unlike aliens, they don't bring all that racial, cultural, and religious baggage that you dislike; they allow you to feel good about yourself without any work at creating or maintaining relationships; and when they are born, you can forget about them, because they cease to be unborn.

It's almost as if, by being born, they have died to you. You can love the unborn and advocate for them without substantially challenging your own wealth, power, or privilege, without re-imagining social structures, apologizing, or making reparations to anyone. They are, in short, the perfect people to love if you want to claim you love Jesus but actually dislike people who breathe.

Prisoners? Immigrants? The sick? The poor? Widows? Orphans? All the groups that are specifically mentioned in the Bible? They all get thrown under the bus for the unborn.

-- Dave Barnhart