-
4 votes
-
Men cause 100% of unwanted pregnancies
22 votes -
Sex strikes have a long and controversial history as a tool of women's protest
8 votes -
Our fury over abortion was dismissed for decades as hysterical
22 votes -
The logic of Alabama’s abortion law should permit you to claim a fetus on your taxes and collect insurance if you miscarry
14 votes -
Missouri HB 126 - "Right to Life of the Unborn Child Act"
9 votes -
The fringe rightwing group changing the UN agenda on abortion rights
9 votes -
Life and death in West Virginia
9 votes -
How doctors and the church conspired to stop an 11-year-old girl from having an abortion after rape
12 votes -
A bill banning most abortions becomes law in Ohio
22 votes -
I'm a Christian doctor and I help women have abortions. Here's how I reconcile that.
5 votes -
Both sides of the abortion debate want to defend and protect
I have stood on both sides of the abortion debate. I was raised conservative. Most of my family is conservative. But I became more liberal as an adult. In listening to both conservatives and...
I have stood on both sides of the abortion debate. I was raised conservative. Most of my family is conservative. But I became more liberal as an adult. In listening to both conservatives and liberals argue their side of the debate they have something fundamental in common: both are motivated by a desire to care and protect. Liberals want to protect the rights, autonomy and health of women. Conservatives want to protect the life of the unborn.
Both sides see the other as monsters out to attack. They think that because the other side works to thwart their efforts to protect, that the other side intends harm. But that's not true. Neither side wants to inflict harm. They may be willing to inflict harm to protect another, but that is not the same as wanting to inflict harm. Those who are pro-choice don't want to kill babies; they want to protect women and sometimes killing the unborn is the unfortunate cost. Similarly those who are pro-life aren't necessarily motivated by a desire to control women*; they want to protect the unborn and limiting some rights of women is the cost.
* This of course comes with some sticky caveats. There is plenty of sexism among many who are pro-life, and plenty of hardliners who think women should be subservient. And those people's sexism does color there views of women's reproductive autonomy. But there are also moderate pro-lifers who otherwise value the rights of women. You don't have to be sexist to be pro-life. Anecdotally the pro-lifers I know personally are in the latter group.
22 votes -
Trump Administration blocks US funds for Planned Parenthood and others over abortion referrals
15 votes -
FBI warned law enforcement agencies of threat posed by non-existent 'pro-choice extremists'
6 votes -
'They ordered me to get an abortion': A Chinese woman's ordeal in Xinjiang
12 votes -
Women in the US can now get safe abortions by mail
15 votes -
I've been an ‘abortion doula’ 2,000 times
9 votes -
'We need to know the sex. If it’s a girl we are going to terminate it'
25 votes -
The fake abortion clinics of America: Misconception
12 votes -
Abortion laws: Australian High Court prepares to hear challenge to picketing ban
7 votes -
Ireland plans to offer abortions for free, as ban is officially repealed
17 votes -
The future abortionists of America
15 votes -
Susan Collins, pivotal US moderate, says ‘hostility’ to Roe would sway her vote
13 votes -
Abortion: Sanctity of Human Life and the Rights of (wo)Man
Yesterday, Ireland passed a referendum that will repeal a constitutional amendment that banned abortions. The government of Ireland will now have the explicit authority (as soon as the results are...
Yesterday, Ireland passed a referendum that will repeal a constitutional amendment that banned abortions. The government of Ireland will now have the explicit authority (as soon as the results are certified) to legislate matters of abortion directly. This seems likely to lead to a substantially less restrictive stance toward abortion in one of the most restrictive member nations of the EU. It would still likely end up being slightly more restrictive law than in the United States.
Ireland's history regarding abortion's legality is explicitly tied as a counter-reaction to Roe V. Wade, the American supreme court case that found abortion legal until the third trimester under a rights-balancing test under the 9th and 14th amendments (which--implicitly--enshrines a right to privacy and--explicitly--expands that right to the state level, respectively). While this balancing test was later changed to a standard requiring "fetal viability," states and activists through the United States organized against the Supreme Court's decision to create new limitations on abortion.
So today, I'm seeking to sidestep some of that history to wrestle with the core underlying balancing test Roe v Wade and other similar legal frameworks have tried to answer: when is a pregnant woman's rights more or less important than the life of the living being growing inside of her? In what circumstances (if any) should a woman be allowed to choose to end her pregnancy?
19 votes -
Ireland ends abortion ban as 'quiet revolution' transforms country
13 votes -
Ireland’s abortion vote becomes a test for Facebook and Google
5 votes