Here's to the women who's contraception has never failed! Here's to the girls who made it to adulthood without experiencing sexual abuse and/or incest! Here's to the women who have never been raped! Here's to the women that have never been coerced or sabotaged into pregnancy! Let me applaud the one or two of you.
Odds are even Martha McSally didn't beat the shitty statistics of what it means to be female in this society.
@ Corduval
You are correct. The Weekly writer, Mr. Nintzel, contributed approximately four sentences of original writing to accompany the multiple quoted paragraphs from other sources.
So I suppose that means I should have ignored this gem of an "article" from a supposedly progressive publication that states in the TITLE(which I saw on Twitter because I follow The Weekly and have read it for more than a decade) "Defending Trent Franks' Comments..."
I wish I could interpret the title as tongue in cheek. Unfortunately, the writer does not actually write enough for me to get a good grasp on the article's actual views/biases so I do have to infer a lot from the title.
Yes gentlemen, let's debate the semantics of rate vs. incidence. Because that's of real importance when you are discussing real life and real forced birth situations.
I guess the main question always has been and always will be: "Are women people? Do women have the same right as people do to bodily autonomy and privacy?"
I don't care if a rape victim or incest victim or ANY woman vacillates back and forth(because such decisions are not always easy and can be full of pain especially because of fear of social stigma) until the 39th week of a 40 week pregnancy. It is a safe medical procedure that has benefits/risks that are best decided by the patient and the physician in a bullshit-regulation free environment.
If abortion was treated like tubal ligation or vasectomy i.e. a medical procedure between a patient and physician, the "Gosnell situation" would have never existed. Defending anti-choice politicians, who keep moving the goalposts for a safe, legal medical procedure, isn't a good look on you Tucson Weekly.
Huh, I'm a little nervous that my previous comment has only received "likes" considering some of the views expressed. Still haven't figured out that sarcasm HTML, so to be clear: The hypocrisy of promoting one Constitutional Amendment to the detriment of another is just some more of the same for many "conservatives". Can't spend a dollar for aid unless it is my district, can't restrict freedom unless it is freedom of reproductive choice...
Recent Comments
Odds are even Martha McSally didn't beat the shitty statistics of what it means to be female in this society.
You are correct. The Weekly writer, Mr. Nintzel, contributed approximately four sentences of original writing to accompany the multiple quoted paragraphs from other sources.
So I suppose that means I should have ignored this gem of an "article" from a supposedly progressive publication that states in the TITLE(which I saw on Twitter because I follow The Weekly and have read it for more than a decade) "Defending Trent Franks' Comments..."
I wish I could interpret the title as tongue in cheek. Unfortunately, the writer does not actually write enough for me to get a good grasp on the article's actual views/biases so I do have to infer a lot from the title.
Yes gentlemen, let's debate the semantics of rate vs. incidence. Because that's of real importance when you are discussing real life and real forced birth situations.
I guess the main question always has been and always will be: "Are women people? Do women have the same right as people do to bodily autonomy and privacy?"
I don't care if a rape victim or incest victim or ANY woman vacillates back and forth(because such decisions are not always easy and can be full of pain especially because of fear of social stigma) until the 39th week of a 40 week pregnancy. It is a safe medical procedure that has benefits/risks that are best decided by the patient and the physician in a bullshit-regulation free environment.