Abortion, adoption, and keeping are all valid choices. Adoption is an alternative to parenthood. Abortion is an alternative to pregnancy. Whatever choice is selected, it should be 100% chosen willingly by the person making the choice. No one else.

your-lies-ruin-lives:

assholeofday:

Mike Pence, Asshole of the Day for October 20, 2014
by TeaPartyCat (Follow @TeaPartyCat)
Long ago Justice Brandeis said that states are the laboratories of democracy. It’s a nice thought, and sometimes it even works out. But since states have latitude to implement policy and their own laws, sometimes the laboratory is more evil scientist than noble experimenter trying to improve the fate of the nation.
Case in point: Indiana has high unemployment, with more job seekers than jobs. So those people out of work have it bad. But Gov. Mike Pence wants to make it worse for them:

Gov. Mike Pence (R) has decided to join seven other states in reinstating work requirements for food stamps despite being eligible for a federal waiver from those rules for the coming fiscal year.
Federal rules require able-bodied, childless people who receive Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits for more than three months a year to demonstrate that they are working or attending a job training program for at least 20 hours a week. But those rules can be waived during times of high economic strain when the work requirements cannot reasonably be fulfilled. Nearly every state requested and received such a waiver during the Great Recession. But a growing number of states have begun reinstating the work rules even though the Department of Agriculture has said their unemployment rates are still high enough to justify waiving the rules.
The state estimates that 65,000 people will be affected by Pence’s change, according to the Indianapolis Star. Previous similar moves in Kansas, New Mexico, Maine, and other states have left tens of thousands of people without access to food stamps. The network of food charities that picks up the slack when hungry people are underserved by government programs is already overstretched around the country, according to the people who run those charities.

There’s a lot there, but it boils down to this: the federal government will waive rules requiring those receiving food stamps (SNAP) to work when unemployment is too high in the state, meaning that there aren’t enough jobs for all those who are on food stamps to work. But Gov. Pence won’t ask for the waiver.
To be clear— these work rules were set in the late 1990s when jobs were plentiful and paid well, but now there aren’t enough jobs for everyone who wants to work. Common sense says accept the waiver so people don’t starve. It’s not their fault there aren’t enough jobs in Gov. Pence’s state.
But Gov. Pence doesn’t want a waiver— he’d rather let these people who can’t find jobs starve. And for that, he is the Asshole of the Day.
It is Mike Pence's second time being named Asshole of the Day. His previous win was for lying about the cost of Obamacare premiums.
Full story: Think Progress.

And this dude’s prolife. Good job, prolifers. This is your kind of leader! 

Nice. Real nice."You HAVE to be born, but if you’re starving, fuck you. Go away."

your-lies-ruin-lives:

assholeofday:

Mike Pence, Asshole of the Day for October 20, 2014

by TeaPartyCat ()

Long ago Justice Brandeis said that states are the laboratories of democracy. It’s a nice thought, and sometimes it even works out. But since states have latitude to implement policy and their own laws, sometimes the laboratory is more evil scientist than noble experimenter trying to improve the fate of the nation.

Case in point: Indiana has high unemployment, with more job seekers than jobs. So those people out of work have it bad. But Gov. Mike Pence wants to make it worse for them:

Gov. Mike Pence (R) has decided to join seven other states in reinstating work requirements for food stamps despite being eligible for a federal waiver from those rules for the coming fiscal year.

Federal rules require able-bodied, childless people who receive Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits for more than three months a year to demonstrate that they are working or attending a job training program for at least 20 hours a week. But those rules can be waived during times of high economic strain when the work requirements cannot reasonably be fulfilled. Nearly every state requested and received such a waiver during the Great Recession. But a growing number of states have begun reinstating the work rules even though the Department of Agriculture has said their unemployment rates are still high enough to justify waiving the rules.

The state estimates that 65,000 people will be affected by Pence’s change, according to the Indianapolis Star. Previous similar moves in Kansas, New Mexico, Maine, and other states have left tens of thousands of people without access to food stamps. The network of food charities that picks up the slack when hungry people are underserved by government programs is already overstretched around the country, according to the people who run those charities.

There’s a lot there, but it boils down to this: the federal government will waive rules requiring those receiving food stamps (SNAP) to work when unemployment is too high in the state, meaning that there aren’t enough jobs for all those who are on food stamps to work. But Gov. Pence won’t ask for the waiver.

To be clear— these work rules were set in the late 1990s when jobs were plentiful and paid well, but now there aren’t enough jobs for everyone who wants to work. Common sense says accept the waiver so people don’t starve. It’s not their fault there aren’t enough jobs in Gov. Pence’s state.

But Gov. Pence doesn’t want a waiver— he’d rather let these people who can’t find jobs starve. And for that, he is the Asshole of the Day.

It is Mike Pence's second time being named Asshole of the Day. His previous win was for lying about the cost of Obamacare premiums.

Full story: Think Progress.

And this dude’s prolife. Good job, prolifers. This is your kind of leader! 

Nice. Real nice.

"You HAVE to be born, but if you’re starving, fuck you. Go away."


proudly-pro-choice:

friendly reminder that people who can get pregnant are not living, breathing incubators.

(via toohottoforyoutohandlle)


your-lies-ruin-lives:

oh-snap-pro-choice:

thepro-lifemovement:

With abortion it’s like God gives you a present, a gift. He goes, “Here, my child, here is the best gift I can offer to you!” And he’s all excited! And then you open this gift and go “oh…..um…. God, I wasn’t asking for a baby… No thanks, I didn’t want one. Sorry, I’m just going to return it….” And God is heartbroken that you didn’t want his gift that meant so much to Him and He hoped it would mean something to you.

People return gifts they don’t want all the time. Literally all the time, with all kinds of things.

FYI if God is omnipotent and omniscient then God knows you’re going to have an abortion before you ever had sex, maybe part of his plan was for that person to have an abortion. If everything is God’s plan then so to is abortion. You don’t get to say what was or wasn’t a part of God’s plan. You are not God.

And it is human arrogance to assume you know the mind of God or what God’s plan is. Especially if you claim to know it better than anyone else knows it.

-Lemon

image


captainjack13:

eveskk:

And does EVERY unwanted child have a home to go to? How about instead of just pressing adoption as an option, you actually, you know, advocate for the adoption of older kids? A fifteen-year-old boy is significantly less likely to be adopted than a newborn female. Does that boy…

Two of my best friends have adopted children. One of them adopted a 13 year old girl, the other adopted a 9 year old boy with learning disabilities. I stand by my original statement.

That doesn’t change that it’s still true. Some children are unwanted. Most children who aren’t adopted when they’re under five or so end up aging out of the system, and the majority of potential adoptive parents are looking for infants. And that’s age. I won’t get into race.


I appreciate the explanation of your stance- pro-choice is NOT equal to pro-abortion. Pro-choice is the belief that individuals should be allowed to plan their family without strangers controlling their life. Love the respectful yet unyielding blog!
by eveskk

Thank you! :)


I really loath the phrase “unwanted children.” Someone, somewhere right now can’t have a child and wants one.

eveskk:

And does EVERY unwanted child have a home to go to? How about instead of just pressing adoption as an option, you actually, you know, advocate for the adoption of older kids? A fifteen-year-old boy is significantly less likely to be adopted than a newborn female. Does that boy deserve to be ignored?

Not every child is wanted and that’s simply the truth.

Ditto. Most people looking to adopt want infants, not teenagers or a child any older than 2. Ignoring that some children are unwanted will not make the fact go away.


fairlion-jade:

"Ban abortion! Look at all of these poor babies being murdered in low income areas!"

*Low Income children grow up and need public assistance*

"ugh fucking parasite leechers stop reproducing you’re sucking our country dry end welfare these people need to find a job!"

Yep. Once they’re not little and cute anymore, anti-choicers don’t care.

(via your-lies-ruin-lives)


Are you really pro-life? Eight questions to ask yourself

nerdloveandlolz:

Here are some questions to consider if you call yourself pro-life.

1. Do you support food stamps, welfare, EBT, WIC, and other programs to provide food and shelter to children of the poor?

If you do not, can you not see that it is logically inconsistent to force the poor to have children that they can’t afford, and then let those children suffer and starve or survive on a diet of cheap, non-nutritious food? Because life continues long after birth; it continues for about 80 years.

2. Do you support increased funding to schools?

If you do not, can you not see that it is logically inconsistent to say that you are pro-life if you want to doom unwanted children to grow up with no hope for the future, no hope to achieve some sort of economic success beyond mere survival? Because there’s more to life than simply breathing. There should be pursuit of happiness.

3. Do you regularly contribute to causes that conduct research on (and are looking for preventions and cures for) spontaneous natural miscarriages?

Per the Mayo Clinic, “About 15 to 20 percent of known pregnancies end in miscarriage. But the actual number is probably much higher because many miscarriages occur so early in pregnancy that a woman doesn’t even know she’s pregnant.” There are approximately 210 million known pregnancies per year, which means that there are at least 30 million miscarriages a year, probably a lot more, of babies who were wanted by both parties and would have been given a loving home.

If you do not support research into preventing natural miscarriages, it is logically inconsistent to call yourself pro-life, since the only life you seek to to support are the lives of fetuses who are unplanned and unwanted. 

4. Do you foster children?

There are approximately 115,000 children in US foster care system right now, children who were unwanted or who could not be cared for by parents, children whose parents have signed them over or abandoned them completely. This doesn’t take into account hundreds of thousands of other children who are mistreated and probably should be taken away from parents who feel saddled with them, or the very least cannot afford to take care of them.

If you do not personally do anything to help take care of children who have been abandoned by their parents, can you not see that it is logically inconsistent to support a policy by which more such unwanted children will be thrust into the world?

5. Do you support comprehensive sex-education, including contraceptive use?

If you do not support sex-education, it is logically inconsistent to state that you are opposed to abortion. The reality is that the urge to have sex is a deeply ingrained human instinct in most people and that in our highly sexualized world, teenagers simply will have sex. It is a fact. It is also a fact that the states where schools do not teach contraceptive use are also those states with the highest teen pregnancy rates.

Saying that you don’t want to teach teenagers about contraceptive use because you don’t want them to have sex is like saying you don’t want to put seat-belts in cars since you think it will encourage people to have accidents. Sex is going to happen. And if you want to prevent abortion, the best thing to do is prevent pregnancy.

6. Do you believe that US women should wear burkas? Do you support the banning of bacon?

If your main reasons for opposing abortion are religious, then it is important to note that the US has separation of church and state. Would you also like to force women in the US to wear burkas since some people here are Muslim? Would you like the US to ban pork products since some people’s religions forbid pork? Do you even support the notion that no one may work on Sundays, or that all people must attend church? If you do not support imposing all religious policies from all religions on all people, then it is logically inconsistent to state that your particular religion should be imposed on people who do not share your religious views. It’s also unconstitutional. 

7. Do you think that making abortion illegal really prevents abortion?

If you have done any research on the subject, you’ll see that “Highly restrictive abortion laws are not associated with lower abortion rates. For example, the abortion rate is 29 per 1,000 women of childbearing age in Africa and 32 per 1,000 in Latin America—regions in which abortion is illegal under most circumstances in the majority of countries. The rate is 12 per 1,000 in Western Europe, where abortion is generally permitted on broad grounds.”

In other words, it has been shown that making abortions illegal does not prevent them from taking place. If you really want to prevent abortion, the best way to do so is, as mentioned above, to provide access to contraception and information on how to use it.

8. Do you define pregnant women as “alive”?

It is unfortunately true that pregnancy carries risk for the mother. “Each year in the U.S., about 700 women die of pregnancy-related complications and 52,000 experience emergencies (requiring hospitalization). An additional 34,000 barely avoid death.”

It is also true that illegal abortions can, and do, lead to the death of the woman. “The British Medical Journal reported in 2003 that 70,000 women a year die from unsafe abortion, equivalent to an airplane crash killing 400 women of reproductive age every few days and noting that such a crash would be reported as a tragic event with wide news coverage. The paper pointed out that deaths of women from unsafe abortion equal 168 such plane crashes every year and deserve our attention.” (source) So again, I ask you — do you define these women as alive? Do you care that they will die if you make abortion illegal?

Compare the figures above to the 12 US women who died as a result of complications from known legal induced abortion in 2008 (CDC), and the fact that in the US at least, fewer than 0.3% of abortion patients experience a complication that requires hospitalization. Further, abortions performed in the first trimester pose virtually no long-term risk of further problems with having children. Also, exhaustive reviews by panels convened by the U.S. and British governments have concluded that there is no association between abortion and breast cancer. There is also no indication that abortion is a risk factor for other cancers. (source)

So the question remains:

Are you pro-life, or are you pro-fetus? Does the life of the mother figure into the picture at all for you? Do you care that forcing a woman to follow through with a pregnancy that she doesn’t want, in order to produce a child that no one will care about at all, when she might just die from doing so is every bit as much an issue of life and death as you perceive abortion to be?

(via your-lies-ruin-lives)



Any pro-choicers into Pokemon?

persephoneholly:

If you are, please remember that on October 21, which the anti-choicers’ appropriation of the GLSEN Day of Silence now made for fetuses, Pokemon ORAS demo is being released. Don’t let anti-choice attitudes get you down. Fight those fuckers and play the demo.

Pokémon keeps me sane!