What Americans Need to Know About Abortion Survivors

[@TheScamper44]

I had no idea this existed - referring of course to the number of “live” or failed terminations, up to fifty per cent of the time… ? wow! awesome to hear these heroes give their testimony - especially on “The Hill!”

[@hideem1]

It doesn’t exist. It is bs. This isn’t real. It’s a lie & wedge issue that billionaires use to get you to vote to allow them to tell you what to do.

[@bigdog194]

Praise GOD for all you are doing, may HE bless you immensely.....

[@hellogoodbye3129]

Masterbation is use for more than self gratification. It is also good for sleep, and avoiding bad life choices. Good luck ladies, we love you. Xoxo

[@TheWorldTeacher]

Kindly repeat that in ENGLISH, Miss.☝️ Incidentally, Slave, are you VEGAN? 🌱

[@dumbut75]

Wonderful conference !!

[@kirkmarusak7800]

The United States had abortions taking place all over the country before Roe vs. Wade was decided in 1973. They were illegal in just about every state at the time, but those prohibited laws never ended abortions as they were intended to do. Licensed physicians but also people who had no medical training were performing abortions on women and girls. There were illegal abortion facilities in homes, but also in warehouses. When people are happy whenever someone claims abortions should be ended do not realize that will never happen even in the states that ban the procedure. If those laws did not work before 1973, then they will not stop abortions today or in the future. The United States now have two FDA approved abortion pills that have no chance of being banned.

[@timemaytell4669]

Are you able to cite laws that have been followed at all times ? If not, then do you believe we should not bother making Any laws, ever again. and remove laws that exist?

[@mfa8086]

Just. Close. Your. Legs.

[@TheWorldTeacher]

💯 THE ETHICS OF ABORTION: Even though (illegitimate) abortion is merely one of a long list of crimes, it is such a controversial issue that it is being given its own subsection. Although some pro-life advocates use the term “abortion” solely in those cases in which the aim and purpose of the procedure is to terminate the life of the unborn child (as opposed to those cases in which the aim is to save the life of the mother, and the death of the embryo is an undesired consequence of the procedure), this author sees no semantic advantage of making such a distinction, and so, in this document, the term “abortion” is applied to any medical procedure in which the life of an embryo or a foetus is DELIBERATELY terminated, for any reason. Of course, just as there is a definite distinction between justified (i.e. legitimate) animal consumption and unjustified (i.e. illegitimate) animal consumption, so too is there a distinction between legitimate abortion and illegitimate abortion. Thus, the terminology has been established. Regarding ABORTION, it is pertinent to make mention of a particularly controversial issue, and that is, whether or not an unborn human (whether zygote, embryo, or foetus) is fully human. The undeniable and blatantly obvious fact is, that a child conceived by two parents of the Homo sapiens species (or even cloned from a single parent) is without a doubt, a unique human being from the very moment of conception. Those in favour of illegal abortion (i.e. killing of an unborn child for unlawful, illicit reasons) are quite adamant that it is perfectly fine to end the life of an unborn child (sometimes even a birthed child, believe it or not!) due to it being underdeveloped, insentient, and/or unconscious. Because there are some pro-abortion (that is, pro-unjustifiable-abortion) advocates who make desperate attempts to find flaws in the pro-life position, here, “conception” refers to the very moment that a spermatozoon nucleus fuses with an ovum nucleus, and syngamy takes place. However, it is important to understand that the question of the precise millisecond when a unique human life begins is completely redundant, because nobody is likely to surgically operate on a woman shortly after sexual intercourse has taken place, in order to prevent a fertilized egg from achieving syngamy! As mentioned in Chapter 28, whenever any one of the procreative, recreative, or unitive aspects of sex is omitted, sex becomes a selfish, sinful act, and so, to prevent a newly-fertilized ovum from its natural course of events, would count as a criminal act. Any human with adequate intelligence knows that even after an infant child has been birthed, it is still not fully developed, since it has yet to pass through the preliminary phases of life such as childhood and adolescence. So then, why stop killing at the foetal stage? Why not destroy the life of a twelve-year-old boy, since he has not yet fully developed unto adulthood? The fact remains that a human is fully human, regardless of the phase of life in which it is situated. It is not partially human and partially giraffe - it is fully human. The aforementioned prenatal stages (zygote, embryo, and foetus) are just that - merely stages of the human life cycle, and although, according to normative mores, the life of an embryo may not be quite as morally valuable as that of a five-year-old child, that is insufficient justification alone for extinguishing its very life! Therefore, it is debatable whether or not a human zygote or an embryo is, by the strictest definitions of the terms, a conscious person, but it is INDISPUTABLE that it is a human being, worthy of protection, and must not be unlawfully terminated in a just society. Before contemplating the brutal destruction of an innocent human being, one should have an exceedingly-justifiable rationale. Demonic humans (see Chapter 14) are constantly inventing multifarious excuses for murdering poor, innocent, defenceless children, purely in order to rationalize their wicked agenda, but there are only two scenarios in which abortion may be lawful. It is indeed fortuitous that the mothers of outstanding historic personalities such as Lords Krishna, Gautama, and Jesus decided to not murder their precious offspring! In brief, abortion is justified only in the case of rape or if the mother’s life is endangered. Obviously, that does not imply that the life of the baby of a raped woman MUST be terminated. As mentioned in the next paragraph (in relation to my own course of action in the hypothetical case of the rape of a female family member), I would do everything in my power to convince a raped family member to lovingly nurture the child unto birth, and then relinquish the child to an adoptive family. Therefore, when all is said and done, the need for any kind of (legitimate) abortion would be such a tiny fraction of one percent of all pregnancies that it would be more simply expressed as a negative exponent. Only if the expectant mother is acutely distressed by carrying the child of her rapist, should abortion be considered, and it would be preferable for the raped woman to do so as soon as practical. It would be a truly savage, barbaric act for her to kill her child in the third trimester of pregnancy! Personally, I don’t think that I could ever condone the abortion of a child, by a woman in my family, even if she was the victim of rape, because I could NEVER perform the act of inserting my arm into the uterus of my mother, one of my wives or daughters, and manually extracting the embryo or foetus. And if I could not bring myself to perform such a despicable deed myself, I ought not pay a (so-called) doctor to execute the baby on my behalf. Sometimes, I feel faintly guilty destroying the life of an insect, such as a mosquito or an ant, even when it is attacking me or my food supply, what to speak of terminating the life of a fellow human being, the most highly-evolved species of life in the known universe! As noted in the glossary of this book, it could be seen as hypocritical, or at least somewhat disingenuous, for a person to kill a non-human animal unless that person is willing to do so with his or her bare hands. I could never squeeze a rat to death using just my bare hands, so I ought not dismember a member of my own species, no matter how small it may be, without proper justification, according to moral norms. Perhaps the most common justification for illegitimate abortion (that is, the murder of innocent, defenceless, unborn human beings) is that a woman ought to have AUTONOMY over her own body. Of course, those who raise such arguments conveniently overlook the fact that the pre-born human, by the same token, is entitled to the very same bodily autonomy as its mother! Those who are afflicted with a demonic mentality (which, after reading Chapter 14, as well as many other chapters of this treatise, one should come to understand to be practically every person on the planet), especially those persons residing in nations/countries with a predominantly leftist (“adharma”, in Sanskrit) populace will never come to accept the fact that no human being who has ever lived is his or her own master/mistress, and therefore, has no such “right” as autonomy over his or her own body. Does a newborn child have autonomy over him/herself? Obviously not, otherwise no parent would dare to regulate the activities of their offspring. Does a mother have autonomy over herself? Definitely not, since her lord and master (the word “husband” literally denotes the master of a house - see Chapter 27) has absolute authority to direct and control her actions and movements. Again, this bitter truth, will never ever be accepted by the vast majority of the population, but the truth must be proclaimed, nevertheless. Incidentally, the very same paradigm outlined above, applies also to societal organization, in which a father has full authority over his family, a grandfather has full authority over his extended family, a patriarch has full authority over his clan, a chief has full authority over his tribe, a (genuine) king has complete and utter authority over his subjects, and finally, a (genuine) priest has authority over his entire society. The only humans who can possibly claim to have complete AUTONOMY over themselves are those excruciatingly-rare men who have risen to the role of World Teacher (“Avatāra”, in Sanskrit), and only then, solely upon their actual entry to the Holy Priesthood. As children, Avatars are subject to the authority of their mothers, then, upon adulthood, to the authority of their fathers, and if they happen to perform some kind of work prior to entering the Priesthood (as with Lord Jesus Christ, who worked as a carpenter before He began His priestly ministry), to their employers. Possibly the saddest aspect of the abortion debate is the fact that the sex that has evolved to MOST nourish and protect vulnerable human offspring, is more in favour of illegitimate abortion. Personally, I am very thankful that my mother was not a miserable, rabid feminist who would have considered murdering the next World Teacher for any trivial reason whatever. Apart from the legitimacy of abortion in the very rare instances of rape or danger to the life of the mother, not a single one of their frivolous reasons is reasonable to a person of civility and intelligence. There will always be at least one decent family that will gladly take an unwanted newborn baby from a murderous parent. N.B. It is rather important to refer to the Glossary definitions of some of the terms used in this subsection.

[@hideem1]

You’re disgusting & a fool. Abortion is healthcare, but sure let these billionaire aholes control your mind with an imaginary made up crock of total shyt that isn’t real.

[@timemaytell4669]

tell that to the underage rape victim.

[@mfa8086]

@@timemaytell4669 it’s not about that and you know it. Most abortions are for convenience not rape/incest. That girl who got raped can get an abortion, I guess. But why does the baby pay for the sins of the father? Can’t we be more mature than killing the baby? For the 98% of people having abortions so they can be sexually active: close, your, legs.