I believe the reasoning goes something like this: If you give a woman an abortion, you kill a baby, and babies are cute. We want to protect them as long as it costs us nothing to do so. Make us pay for stuff like diapers, food, health care, or day care, and then you're just commie/socialist scum. That's a woman's responsibility. But forcing her to have the child is free, so we can do that. If the baby or mother dies because of the pregnancy, that is clearly what God wanted. At least no human killed anyone. And allowing a person to die is totally different from killing a person. This is why it's fine not to help starving people or people in dire need of medical attention.
Or maybe the reasoning is just: God those uppity women and their rights. Next thing you know they'll be wanting to be treated with respect. We'll show them. They'll be slaves to their biology, and then they'll finally know their place enough to sexx0r me up properly and not think I'm beneath them.
i'm am positively shaking in anger... how dare anyone say what i can and cannot do to my own body?? MUCHLESS tell me that i will die because they don't want to do a medical procedure that will save my life??? two people were a part of this creation of life, yet only one is being punished by death? wtf??? this is beyond rediculous
And yet Australia is still nicer baout it than the US. They refused to perform it publicly - for free. She was able to get ir privately. In the US, it would always cost a citizen to get any procedure. In theory, if you cannot afford a procedure and it is a life or death emergency, then they cannot make you pay (although they will still charge you and your credit history will be destroyed, and you'll be in debt until you pay it). However, "life or death emergency" is an ambiguous term. It usually means immediate threat to your life, not potential threat. So, in the US, if you're poor, you're pretty much totally SOL. While in Australia, some hospitals ~might~ do it publicly and for free.
yeah see... i will never live in the states. i had a friend who had a broken arm for TWO WEEKS was unable to go to the hospital because he didn't have insurance, or money to pay for them to fix it, and cast it.
a society like that dosn't make me feel happy to live there. sorry, sad but true.
You're kind of preaching to the choir here... I try not to rant about it too often, and in truth it's not that bad, but I've been curably blind for over two and a half years, because medicaid kicks in 2.5 years after disability is confirmed. And that's only if you worked enough before you became too sick to work to qualify for it. I'm lucky, and I do qualify. I'm also lucky that as far as I know the risk of delaying surgery hasn't made the blindness permanent, but it could have.
hangs head in shame. 55% of australians say sorry. including many in the current ruling party. unfortunately, the fucking fundies hae the top positions and all the moderates have been shifted out of posiitons of power within the party. Sorry.
not fucking hapy jan. very suprised the sun treated it that well, usualy it;s the right wing mouthpeace.
Australia has changed a lot since i last left. I get people up here who gasp and say 'Why are you in Canada' and I respond that the political climate here is much friedlier to women, achievers and people who don't follow the straight and narrow.
I hold dual citizenship, so I think I have the right to be appalled :P
This type of thing would never happen in the U.S., where conservatives want to overturn Roe v. Wade? I recently read about a woman who was denied a D&C to remove a dead fetus from her womb because the procedure was the same thing as an abortion.
Well, what people don't understand is that Roe v Wade didn't legalize abortion. It just said that you couldn't be prosecuted in a state where abortion is illegal for having an abortion in a state where abortion is legal, and that medical procedures are between you and your doctor. Which did, in effect, legalize abortion, but even if it were overturned it wouldn't change any state laws.
I believe the reasoning goes something like this: If you give a woman an abortion, you kill a baby, and babies are cute. We want to protect them as long as it costs us nothing to do so. Make us pay for stuff like diapers, food, health care, or day care, and then you're just commie/socialist scum. That's a woman's responsibility. But forcing her to have the child is free, so we can do that. If the baby or mother dies because of the pregnancy, that is clearly what God wanted. At least no human killed anyone. And allowing a person to die is totally different from killing a person. This is why it's fine not to help starving people or people in dire need of medical attention.
Or maybe the reasoning is just: God those uppity women and their rights. Next thing you know they'll be wanting to be treated with respect. We'll show them. They'll be slaves to their biology, and then they'll finally know their place enough to sexx0r me up properly and not think I'm beneath them.
i'm am positively shaking in anger... how dare anyone say what i can and cannot do to my own body?? MUCHLESS tell me that i will die because they don't want to do a medical procedure that will save my life??? two people were a part of this creation of life, yet only one is being punished by death? wtf??? this is beyond rediculous
And yet Australia is still nicer baout it than the US. They refused to perform it publicly - for free. She was able to get ir privately. In the US, it would always cost a citizen to get any procedure. In theory, if you cannot afford a procedure and it is a life or death emergency, then they cannot make you pay (although they will still charge you and your credit history will be destroyed, and you'll be in debt until you pay it). However, "life or death emergency" is an ambiguous term. It usually means immediate threat to your life, not potential threat. So, in the US, if you're poor, you're pretty much totally SOL. While in Australia, some hospitals ~might~ do it publicly and for free.
yeah see... i will never live in the states. i had a friend who had a broken arm for TWO WEEKS was unable to go to the hospital because he didn't have insurance, or money to pay for them to fix it, and cast it.
a society like that dosn't make me feel happy to live there. sorry, sad but true.
You're kind of preaching to the choir here... I try not to rant about it too often, and in truth it's not that bad, but I've been curably blind for over two and a half years, because medicaid kicks in 2.5 years after disability is confirmed. And that's only if you worked enough before you became too sick to work to qualify for it. I'm lucky, and I do qualify. I'm also lucky that as far as I know the risk of delaying surgery hasn't made the blindness permanent, but it could have.
hangs head in shame. 55% of australians say sorry. including many in the current ruling party. unfortunately, the fucking fundies hae the top positions and all the moderates have been shifted out of posiitons of power within the party. Sorry.
not fucking hapy jan. very suprised the sun treated it that well, usualy it;s the right wing mouthpeace.
Australia has changed a lot since i last left. I get people up here who gasp and say 'Why are you in Canada' and I respond that the political climate here is much friedlier to women, achievers and people who don't follow the straight and narrow.
I hold dual citizenship, so I think I have the right to be appalled :P
This type of thing would never happen in the U.S., where conservatives want to overturn Roe v. Wade? I recently read about a woman who was denied a D&C to remove a dead fetus from her womb because the procedure was the same thing as an abortion.
Well, what people don't understand is that Roe v Wade didn't legalize abortion. It just said that you couldn't be prosecuted in a state where abortion is illegal for having an abortion in a state where abortion is legal, and that medical procedures are between you and your doctor. Which did, in effect, legalize abortion, but even if it were overturned it wouldn't change any state laws.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
no subject
no subject
I believe the reasoning goes something like this:
If you give a woman an abortion, you kill a baby, and babies are cute. We want to protect them as long as it costs us nothing to do so. Make us pay for stuff like diapers, food, health care, or day care, and then you're just commie/socialist scum. That's a woman's responsibility. But forcing her to have the child is free, so we can do that. If the baby or mother dies because of the pregnancy, that is clearly what God wanted. At least no human killed anyone. And allowing a person to die is totally different from killing a person. This is why it's fine not to help starving people or people in dire need of medical attention.
Or maybe the reasoning is just:
God those uppity women and their rights. Next thing you know they'll be wanting to be treated with respect. We'll show them. They'll be slaves to their biology, and then they'll finally know their place enough to sexx0r me up properly and not think I'm beneath them.
Hard to say...
no subject
no subject
no subject
a society like that dosn't make me feel happy to live there. sorry, sad but true.
no subject
The unlucky in the US have it far, far worse.
no subject
menconservatives want to stir up the issue again.no subject
Sorry.
not fucking hapy jan. very suprised the sun treated it that well, usualy it;s the right wing mouthpeace.
no subject
I hold dual citizenship, so I think I have the right to be appalled :P
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
I believe the reasoning goes something like this:
If you give a woman an abortion, you kill a baby, and babies are cute. We want to protect them as long as it costs us nothing to do so. Make us pay for stuff like diapers, food, health care, or day care, and then you're just commie/socialist scum. That's a woman's responsibility. But forcing her to have the child is free, so we can do that. If the baby or mother dies because of the pregnancy, that is clearly what God wanted. At least no human killed anyone. And allowing a person to die is totally different from killing a person. This is why it's fine not to help starving people or people in dire need of medical attention.
Or maybe the reasoning is just:
God those uppity women and their rights. Next thing you know they'll be wanting to be treated with respect. We'll show them. They'll be slaves to their biology, and then they'll finally know their place enough to sexx0r me up properly and not think I'm beneath them.
Hard to say...
no subject
no subject
no subject
a society like that dosn't make me feel happy to live there. sorry, sad but true.
no subject
The unlucky in the US have it far, far worse.
no subject
menconservatives want to stir up the issue again.no subject
Sorry.
not fucking hapy jan. very suprised the sun treated it that well, usualy it;s the right wing mouthpeace.
no subject
I hold dual citizenship, so I think I have the right to be appalled :P
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject