A Supreme Court victory for pregnant women
by Carder
In 2014, your AUL team learned about Peggy Young, a pregnant mother who was a driver for UPS. Though other workers received a “lighter duty” accommodation for conditions like sprained ankles, Peggy was denied an accommodation during her pregnancy.
We knew how important it was for us to get behind Peggy – and the women she represents, to ensure that pregnant women are protected from discrimination in the workplace.
You see, if businesses are allowed to penalize – or even fire mothers for being pregnant, the risk of mothers choosing abortion increases.
~ Jeanneane Maxon describing their recent Supreme Court victory in Young v. United Parcel Service, Americans United for Life, March 25
Mar.27, 2015 6:00 am |
The Courts |
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
This is authentic feminism. Thank you, AUL!
When your job is on the line for being pregnant, it is not so much a matter of choosing abortion as it is feeling pressured to abort.
Awesome!
Authentic Femenism, thank you, yes, right on Del! sure beats feminazi which promotes abortion as health care and freedom, leaving women with nothing much else, but only one awful and traumatizing “choice” which rapists love because it humiliates women all the more.
For: Breyer, Roberts, RBG, Kagan, Sotomayor
Kinda for (voted for it, but different reasoning) – Alito
Again: Scalia, Thomas, Kennedy
Abortion is healthcare and freedom. The opposite is subjugation.
Women who become pregnant through rape and are forced to continue an unwanted pregnancy and give birth are the ones who are being traumatized and humiliated.
Reality,
Are you saying that only those women who become pregnant by rape and are “forced” to go to term are traumatized and humiliated? An abortion erases the trauma and humiliation of rape? Are you also suggesting that women who are not impregnated by their attackers are any less traumatized and humiliated?
Your mind works in amazing ways Mary. It might be of interest to specialists in the field. A while back they conducted some tests on successful comedians and found measurable differences from the rest of us.
How do you get from me saying that women who become pregnant through rape and are forced to continue an unwanted pregnancy and give birth suffer trauma and humiliation to the wild claims you have made. Seriously, I’d be interested to know.
All victims of rape suffer trauma and humiliation. When someone falls pregnant due to rape and determine their best, healthiest course of action is to abort but are prevented from doing so, more trauma and humiliation is suffered. Almost like being raped again.
Or was it just a supremely dreadful attempt at constructing a strawman?
Reality,
You seem confused. I made no claims. I asked you questions.
So no matter what her circumstances, the victim of rape is traumatized and humiliated. No argument from me.
“When someone falls pregnant due to rape and determine their best, healthiest course of action is to abort but are prevented from doing so, more trauma and humiliation is suffered. Almost like being raped again.” Source??
leaving women with nothing much else, but only one awful and traumatizing “choice” which rapists love because it humiliates women all the more. – aren’t you going to ask “City…” for a source? Her claim was made first. That’s right, that’s not how you operate is it. You like to demand sources from those who question the original claim rather than from the person who made the original claim don’t you.
The ‘source’ is the women who choose to abort the result of rape because it prevents them suffering a second round of trauma and humiliation.
How are your preparations going for operation jade helm?
Reality,
“City” is anecdotal.
Do you have a link to any study that backs your claim?
jade helm is in the southwest. I don’t live there.
“City” is not anecdotal, “City” is ideological.
If you don’t recognize that women who fall pregnant through rape have abortions to avoid further trauma and humiliation, why do you think they do so?
Any idea why the lady who spoke of her rape and abortion was laughed at by her opponents?
From what I’ve been reading the southwest is just the starting point, the staging area. Haven’t you read the reports of people being rounded up? And about the ‘death domes’? I thought you’d be well up on all this.
Reality,
A source please.
Because they were warped.
People being rounded up. Death domes. Your imagination is running away with you Reality. If its any comfort to you, its actually 1200 troops spread out over 8 states. Stretching a little thin, don’t you think Reality?
See, I was correct…
leaving women with nothing much else, but only one awful and traumatizing “choice” which rapists love because it humiliates women all the more. – aren’t you going to ask “City…” for a source? Her claim was made first. That’s right, that’s not how you operate is it. You like to demand sources from those who question the original claim rather than from the person who made the original claim don’t you.
Because they were warped – yes, these were the legislators who didn’t consider rape a valid reason for women wanting to abort. So they laughed at a woman telling her story. What a mindset.
When I heard of jade helm I googled it and it took quite some time to get past the conspiracy theories from the likes of Alex Jones et al. The usual bunch of swivel-eyed wingnuts. I just wondered what you made of it all.
Reality,
You did not directly quote “City”. You made a statement. “City” is not a scientific study.
Anyone laughing at a victim of sexual assault is warped. And that’s a more charitable assessment than deserved.
Now you know what I make of it all.
My statement was in response to what “City” said, that is quite obvious.
No, “City” is not a scientific study.
Yet you demand a source from me for rebutting what “City” said fist without making such a demand of “City”
Nor did you take up the opportunity to postulate why victims of rape have abortions if you felt it wasn’t for avoiding additional trauma and humiliation.
That tells me what I thought was the case.
So you don’t think the activity is in preparation for Obama cancelling the next presidential election and staying in power either. That’s good to know.
Reality,
Yes you made a statement. You did not directly quote “City”. City is not a scientific study. Thank you.
I was asking for a rebuttal, I was asking for a source supporting your claim. So far I’ve only heard about “City”, who is not a scientific study. Its anecdotal.
I don’t need to postulate. I wanted a study to verify your statement. You haven’t given me one.
Was I supposed to think that??
“City” stated leaving women with nothing much else, but only one awful and traumatizing “choice” which rapists love because it humiliates women all the more. to which I responded “Women who become pregnant through rape and are forced to continue an unwanted pregnancy and give birth are the ones who are being traumatized and humiliated.” This was in addition to my response regarding her statement on healthcare, freedom and subjugation. If you are unable to see the connection there then you have a problem.
I was asking for a rebuttal, I was asking for a source supporting your claim. – you are repeating the same mistake, asking the rebutter to provide a source ahead of the originating claimant.
All of which, again, tells me what I thought was the case.
No one is ‘supposed’ to think that but then again I do see some people thinking odd things.
Reality,
No problem at all.
Let’s backtrack a little. In my 11:17am post I asked my questions. In your 7:21PM post you responded.
You made a statement concerning increased trauma and humiliation for the rape victim who cannot abort, like the rape being repeated. I asked for a source. This is an exchange between you and me and does not involve COA.
My bad, I meant to say I was not asking for a rebuttal. My apologies.
Well, you are the one who brought up jade helm.
Yes, you do have a problem.
Your question and my answer related to your wild claims about what I said meant.
You haven’t answered my question as to how you got from me saying that women who become pregnant through rape and are forced to continue an unwanted pregnancy and give birth suffer trauma and humiliation to the wild claims you have made. Seriously, I’d be interested to know.
“City” made a statement regarding rape and abortion, trauma and humiliation. I rebutted it. Yet you persist in thinking that I should be the one to provide a source rather than “City”. I understand if you are a bit miffed that neither “City” or yourself can substantiate her claim. But until and unless it is substantiated I am free to challenge it.
I thought it appropriate to ask :-)
Reality,
I made no claims. I asked you questions.
You addressed those questions when you said all victims of rape suffer trauma and humiliation, with which I agreed.
You then continued with: When someone falls pregnant due to rape and determines their best, healthiest course of action is to abort but are prevented from doing so, more trauma and humiliation is suffered. Almost like being raped again.
I asked for a source. You said: The source is the women who choose to abort the result of rape because it prevents them suffering another round of trauma and humiliation.
That’s not a source. Suppose I were to claim that women are traumatized by abortion. You would rightfully request a source. Somehow I don’t think you would accept me saying my source is the women who have been traumatized by abortion.
In fact I find COA’s claim that rapists want their victims humiliated by abortion dubious at best. I think rapists neither know or care what becomes of their victims. But this discussion is between you and me and concerns a statement you made in response to me.
Well, I’m glad I could reassure you. Please don’t hesitate to consult with me in the future if you are frightened by conspiracy theories.
Just because you butted in after I challenged the claims that “City” made does not dismiss the necessity that the originating claimant provide substantiation.
I know you agree with what I have said regarding where the trauma and humiliation lie.
Frightened? No, I was highly amused by them. Much, much funnier than the Sunday Funnies. I just thought you’d be well versed in what was going on. Consult you? LOL.
Reality,
This is an open forum. There is no “butting in”.
Indeed, the trauma and humiliation lie in this despicable crime.
“Consult you? LOL”
Well, you did bring the subject up. I could only assume you wanted reassurance. Not particularly well versed, I only knew what I read on google.
This is an open forum. There is no “butting in”. – that does not negate what I said. You should have perused the comments further back.
Indeed, the trauma and humiliation lie in this despicable crime. – indeed. Which is only made worse when people attempt to interfere when women find that they will suffer a second dose if they are forced to endure a pregnancy and delivery through rape.
Well, you did bring the subject up. I could only assume you wanted reassurance. – hm, another poor assumption on your behalf. My questions were about your thoughts and possible intent. Nothing about me.
Not particularly well versed, I only knew what I read on google – made you look ;-)
Reality,
I did.
Source please.
Oh I see. Well glad to know you don’t lose any sleep over conspiracy theories. I certainly don’t.
Not quite. I had heard of it but just gave it little thought. Until you brought it up.
If you did peruse back through the earlier comments why have you not demanded “City'” produce a source. I guess it’s for the reason I stated earlier.
I’m pleased to hear that you manage to keep yourself above all the swivel-eyed wingnuttery.
Yeah, you looked :-)
Reality,
The discussion was between you and me, not COA and me. I disagree with what she said. Like I do with many people. I don’t necessarily ask for sources.
LOL. One step ahead of of you my friend. :-)
On what basis do you justify demanding a source of me when you decided you didn’t need to bother regarding the claims that “City” made. That sounds rather inconsistent.
You may think you are one step ahead, the reality is I have completed a lap and caught up to you.
Reality,
Because I asked you. The discussion was between you and me, not COA. You made a statement in response to my question. I asked for the source. You say I lot of things I don’t ask for a source on. So do a lot of people.
Well I imagine it took a lot of running on your part, but glad you finally caught up!
Yes, inconsistent behavior on your part.
I do wish you would read what I have actually said rather than what you wish I had said. You are now so far behind you will never catch up.
Reality,
Not at all.
I asked you questions, you answered, and then you made a statement. I asked for a source to back your statement.
“You are now so far behind you will never catch up”. LOLLL.
I repeated a statement which I had made in response to “City”, how about you deal with that first.
You’re too busy running around in ever diminishing circles to actually get anywhere.
Reality,
Doesn’t matter. You made a statement.
I”m pleased to hear that you manage to keep yourself above all the swivel-eyed wingnuttery”. Why thank you Reality. :-)
Isn’t that the question you should be posing to “City”?
Thank you. Keep your efforts up.
Reality,
She didn’t make the statement, you did.
You’re welcome. You do the same.
And as I have told you multiple times, “City” made the first statement. My statement was in response.
Seems I find it far less difficult than others to avoid such nonsense.
Reality,
And I’ve told you that’s irrelevant. You made the statement.
You have a stunning ability to construct your own reality. That doesn’t mean I have to be a part of it.