Any suggestions or strategies for the (Democrats) in this upcoming 2022 midterm election?

Not one girl or woman I’ve ever known has been anything but sad—and some traumatized—because they made the choice to have an abortion.

That doesn’t mean it wasn’t the best choice for them at the time.

Even if the mother’s life is at risk, abortion isn’t a happy choice, but it must always be the woman’s choice.

Well. maybe you've not met the woman I am, or scores of women like me.

There's no reason to be sad or traumatized by a decision that's right.

Exactly what I've been saying.

What you are saying is wrong.

What you, and Lash, are saying is that morally speaking, women are wrong to seek a medical procedure they require. You are passing judgement, in moral terms along with legal terms, who deserves protection and who deserves moral condemnation.

You do not deserve to do that.

How is this so hard of a concept to grasp?

1. That's not entirely true.
2 A person can be sad and traumatized by a decision regardless to whether a decision is either right or wrong.
3. A person can honestly and truthfully say that if they had to do it all again, they would do the exact same thing.
4. And a person can honestly and truthfully believe that it was and is the right thing to do.
5. My point is, even when a person truly and honestly believe that they are doing the right thing, they can still become sad and traumatized by their decision.
6. What I am saying, isn't necessarily about the topic of abortion.
7. It can be about the topic of abortion, but it can also be about whole range of difficult decisions a person might make in their lives.
8. Yes, I am using the term "difficult decision"
9. Yes, a person can make a very difficult decision that they know deep inside is the right decision and still be hurt and traumatized by that decision.
10. One example: If someone was left to make the decision to pull a love-one off of life support, because they were brain dead, that can be a sad and traumatizing to have to make that decision.
11. In that example, just because it is the right thing to do, doesn't mean that the decision won't cause you pain and sadness.

1. What I like about this particular post you made to edgarblythe is, it was done so in a non-combative manner.
2. Some of your previous post had a different tone.

1. For the record, I believe the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade is wrong on multiple levels.

2. For the record, I believe the restrictive laws being passed into law by Republicans in various States across the country is also wrong on multiple levels.

Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell says stricter abortion rules ‘possible’ if Roe is overturned.


Published May 8, 2022




https://nypost.com/2022/05/08/mcconnell-says-national-abortion-ban-possible/?msclkid=0ea60073cf6511ecac478eb22e5151ff

I don't think either of them said it was morally wrong.

I think they were saying that there was emotional baggage attached.

I have known some women who have had an abortion with seemingly no emotional effects at all others who have had a hard time dealing with it regardless of the circumstances.

Knowing that a medical procedure was the right decision to make doesn't stop all those negative feelings, and pointing out that some women suffer such feelings isn't saying that abortion is morally wrong.

Abortion is a mistake, and it should be limited as much as possible with education and free access to birth control methods including morning after pills.

Women's reproductive rights are a human right, but that doesn't mean they should only be viewed through rose tinted spectacles.

The last lines in the article I posted reads:



1. If the Republicans were to take back the Senate, they wouldn't have 60 votes the same way the Dems don't have 60 votes.

2. My question is, if the republicans were to take back the Senate, are they planning on doing a filibuster carve-out to achieve what Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell said about passing more restrictive abortion laws at the federal level.

3. If the Dems need 60 votes to codify Roe v Wade, wouldn't the Republicans need 60 votes to pass more restrictive abortion laws at a federal level?

4. Unless the Republicans already have plans of doing a filibuster carve-out.

5. I wonder what Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema think about the republicans plans.

I'm absolutely sure that Republican Mitch McConnell is very aware that even if the republicans were to take by the Senate, that a filibuster carve out to pass more restrictive abortions laws wouldn't matter, because his party still wouldn't have the White House in 2022 and possibly not have the House.

Moscow Mitch always think in long term goals. Goal number 1 was spend years trying to pack the Supreme Court with Justices he believe would overturn Roe v. Wade. Goal number 2 was is to wait for the next time for the republicans to simultaneously take back the Senate, the House, and White House at the same time. Goal number 3 would be to either abolish the filibuster or to at least do filibuster carve-out to pass more restrictive abortion laws at a federal level.

I believe that Moscow Mitch has been planning this three step goal for many years. As I was saying Moscow Mitch does long term planning.

Also, he would make sure that there would be no meaningful voting rights bill past, because that would interfere with goal number 2, which is for his party to simultaneously take back the Senate, the House, and the White House at the same time. And that would interfere with republicans winning in some local elections as well.

If you don't believe what I'm saying, why would he signal his plans with a statement about passing more restrictive abortion laws at a federal level.

He already knows he don't have 60 votes and I'm pretty certain that he knows that him ever getting 60 votes in his lifetime is not likely to happen.

If you think Moscow Mitch would let a 60 vote threshold get in his way whenever everything lines up the way he plans, you are very gullible.

Don't kid yourself, Moscow Mitch is slick as oil.

The sad thing is that I believe that both Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema are smart enough to know of Moscow Mitch's plan. The even more sad thing is both Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema are actually okay with Moscow Mitch plan.

With the shenanigans of Moscow Mitch and the entire Republican party's long term plan, you would think that Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema would both do everything in their power prevent Moscow Mitch from achieving this long term goal.

Als Moscow Mitch and the entire Republican party have been and will continue to oppose any voting rights bill from ever seeing the light of day.

If meaningful voting rights bill were to pass into law, the Republican party would lose more elections than they would win. The republican party now have the philosophy that they have a better chance of winning elections if they get to pick their voters instead of letting the voters pick them. A meaningful voting rights bill would put an end to that crap and the Republicans know that is the case. And the Republicans are scared shitless of the realization that realization.

The republicans are terrified to ever have to run on their ideals and policy position.

They are scared because they know damn well, that if almost every American voted, that America would reject their ideals and policy position.

So, all the Republicans have to do is never allow meaningful voting right s bill to ever being passed into law.

I know it is a long shot, but Maybe the dems should by-pass Manchin and Sinema. And instead, look to Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins to do a filibuster carve-out for voting rights bill.


Everything I am saying here is just my opinion.
You can agree with my opinion.
Or you can disagree with my opinion.

Although I do think Lash was guilty of using emotive language when she talked about a "homecoming Queen," ( whatever that is,) losing her little boy.

It wasn't a little boy, it was a collection of cells.

It may havehad the potential to develop into a boy, but at the time it was just acollection of cells, cells which the body may well have miscarried before being brought to full term.

They have implied that, just as you have. Anecdotal evidence and judgement and saying it was a "mistake" are all qualifiers.

For some, but not all. And being forced into feeling contrite isn't healthy or moral.

As with all things, people react differently to different things.

And some women don't feel such emotions.

No, having an unwanted pregnancy was a mistake, abortion is the solution.

Who, exactly, is doing that?

I've not implied any such thing.

A lot of women feel guilty when they have a miscarriage.

Does that mean someone who has a miscarriage is morally wrong?

Who is forcing anyone to feel contrite?

You are living in a fantasy world where if you decree something is necessary then nobody will ever feel znything negative.

That is complete bollocks, and if you deny people the truth about abortion that is no different from denying them abortion.

People should be allowed to make an informed decision.

The solution to an unwanted pregnancy is birth control.

You are right, you didn't imply anything. You actually came out and said, abortion is a mistake. And I said, no, it is not. I can quote both posts if you wish. But I think you're smarter than that.

A lot of women feel grief when they miscarry. More so than guilt.

No, a miscarriage is not morally wrong.

Throwing judgment at women who have abortions are forcing them to have to justify their reason to pacify others.

I live in a world where people think it's ok to pass judgement on a women seeking a medical procedure. That's a reality that needs changing.

The truth about abortion... Which is..?

Women make informed decisions all the time. Having an abortion is one of them.

Abortion is a mistake, it's a medical procedure which costs resources that could be used elsewhere.

It's far better to stop the pregnancy in the first place by using birth control.

How can anyone think an abortion is preferable to that?

The problem is that many anti abortion activists are also against birth control and sex education.

When Mother Theresa was asked what was wrong with the world her reply was that the two worst evils affecting the world were abortion and birth control.

This was a woman who cosied up to dictators like Baby Doc Duvalier.

Abortion is a woman's right, there shouldn't be any obstacles placed in her path. However, it has to be preferable to stop conception in the first place than undergo an invasive medical procedure.

I have not judged anyone for having an abortion.

You are the judgemental one, putting words in people's mouths.

You've not said a word about sex education, contraception or counselling, and refuse to accept than any women feel guilt for having had an abortion.

You appear to be of the opinion that anyone who points out that some women feel guilty is the same as saying abortion 8s morally wrong.

No wonder you're having such problems with wade vs roe if this is the approach you take to people who support a woman's right to choose.

It's not an informed decision if they're told the emotional impact is no different from having an ingrowing toenail removed.

Is that what you think happens when a woman goes in for an abortion?

Seriously??