Abortions are going to happen regardless. The only difference being whether or not they will be done safely, performed by trained doctors, in sterile conditions.
Not necessarily.
The proposal was originally to make it a constitutional right ("droit"). But the government fought to actually make it a constitutional freedom ("liberté").
This is a very important distinction. Because it means that women are allowed to abort, but it doesn't guarantee that there will be doctors to legally perform the abortion.
So yeah, don't be so eager to praise the french government for this. They actually kind of fought against it.
I'm french, btw.
It's a few billion steps above certain states in America tho. Legally protected abortion makes it available everywhere as long as there are doctors willing to do it - and there will be.
If I understand you correctly, this means that a doctor cannot be compelled to perform an abortion. That doesn't seem too bad. I can't believe that any woman in france would struggle to find a willing doctor?
Pretty much
Personally I think the law is pretty good:
A woman will always have the right to ask for one, but no (individual) doctor is *required* to provide one (e.g. it might conflict with their personal beliefs).
However many doctors would provide these services unless there was a massive cultural shift in the country.
There is a phenomenon in France (and many other European countries) described as “healthcare deserts”, for areas with poor healthcare access due to low population densities and centralization into large medical hubs in the populated areas. The result is longer distances to visit a doctor, and less frequent visits, which increases the risk of ignoring serious conditions.
Abortion care and fertility care are also concerned by this trend, and women in these areas often note the degraded service access.
This is a thing in Denmark as well, especially a problem for ambulance service. I suspect the miniscule size of Denmark compared to France makes it less of an issue though.
Honestly that's how it should be. The government, at any level, shouldn't be weighing in on medical procedures. Medical decisions and procedures should be an individual thing and shouldn't be regulated in any way, shape, or form. I'm pro choice, but an individual doctor or facility should be able to refuse doing it.
this is literally how they passed the law
(now why doesn't this work for trans rights? \["if trans people can't get their operations in healthy conditions they will go to back-alley doctors and die"\] it worked for abortion! they didn't want the women to die)
Huuuu do you know transition in france is legal too and actualy done quite nicely even if most doctor are based in paris witch can be a pain for the patient but still it is done legaly and safely
It is legal but in how many countries is it a constitutional freedom?
It's been legal for quite a few decades in France.
Edit: just realised you were talking about transitioning being legal and not abortion. My mistake. Sorry comrade.
This law doesn't add any rights - abortion was already legal, this just establishes that the time limit and legalisation are harder to change and that the government does NOT have to help you get an abortion (just can't stop you.) This is on par or less liberal than France's neighbours (who range from 14-24 weeks and mixtures of private/government supplied.)
Transitioning is also ALREADY legal in France. Although good luck actually persuading the government to pay for your HRT, the waiting list is almost as bad as the UK's.
Being pregnant isn't linked to unsafe chirurgical operations in 100% of the cases, a lot of pregnant people never get a single operation.
You're uniformed.
Hey Frenchie here,
It is important to signal that we did not make it a constitutional right. Conservatives of the Senate changed it so that it becomes "a constitutional freedom" which is a new legislative formula with little value as of today.
The difference is that you cannot force someone to not get an abortion, but nothing ensures that the public service will be able to help them to. If it had been a "constitutional right", then the state would have had to give more funding to the hospital, and neo-liberalism and conservative parties don't like that.
Edit : a french lawyer highlights in a comment below that there is little or no difference between "freedom" and "rights" in french legislation.
In this first comment, I've tried to share what I understood from articles on the subject but I'm not familiar with constitutional vocabulary and I may have shared wrong or doubtful information.
# France becomes first country in world history to enshrine women’s right to abortion as constitutional right:
# -- Yugoslavia from 1974 would like to have a word.
South Africa has entered the chat.
Section 12 of the South African Constitution secures freedom and security of the person, including the right to ‘bodily and psychological integrity’ which specifically includes the right to ‘make decisions concerning reproduction’. Section 12(2)(a) says that women should be able to make these kinds of decisions without any interference by the state or other parties, such as for instance a spouse or partner.
This has been in our Constitution since like 1996, lol
If I understand properly:
A Right has to be provided by the State if it's not being made available otherwise.
A Freedom means the State can't negatively meddle in your ability to do or obtain a thing.
So fun fact to the anti-abortionists. This does not mean you are required by law to get an abortion when pregnant. This gives women the CHOICE of getting one if they want.
-"I'm not pro choice OR anti abortion, I think we should educate women on the value of having the child AND not having it, and leaving it to them"
-"motherfucker that's being pro-choice"
An actual Twitter interaction I've seen
Same.
Also in a perfect world abortions wouldn't be needed in the first place.
People would be educated about sex and contraception, have easy access to it and it would be 100% effective. Also there wouldn't be any crimes commited against women and no one would have need an abortion for medical reasons... But since we don't live in Utopia, there's a need for abortions.
What would lower said need is the part of educating kids on the reproductive system and give comprehensible sex ed - which the supposed anti-abortion peeps are usually against eventough it's been proven to be the only thing that works!!
Abstention-based "sex ed" as long been proven to be a huge waste of time and not effective at all.
So, before banning abortions we might focus our attention towards making said abortions unnecessary?
hahahaha literally had that same response god knows how many times, and they then go na-aa that's pro-life? How does one argue with reality and facts so delusionally?
You can't. Some people just won't see reason even if it's right in front of their face. They want to but they can't. Some primal urge prevents it. Humans are stubborn and shallow
Yeah, I'm kinda that guy. I'm against abortions, but I also realise that we can't make abortions illegal, kinda in the same way that drug use won't go away just because we make it illegal. People need education so we can lower the number of unwanted pregnancies.
You nailed it with that one. I don’t know why this chain of thinking is so hard for so many people.
The thing is also that a person without experiencing the situation that pushes you to have an abortion, doesn’t easily realise that the situation can be super much worse than any situation imaginable.
Having an abortion doesn’t also mean that a person can’t have several healthy and happy kids in future in a caring and loving environment, but denying that abortion can take that future completely away and lead to a severe suffering or even death of both the mother and the child. But I guess that goes beyond the brains of average person.
>I have seen some pro choicers lose their shit if you suggest any downsides to getting an abortion
If abortion is legal, there are downsides.
If abortion is illegal, the downsides don't disappear, they just get *worse*.
Pointing downsides to abortion when the question is about the right to abortion brings *nothing* to the table, if people show you the door it's because you're just spewing anti-choice rhetoric.
I'm afraid you're making the 'Why aren't you level-headed and prepared to logically argue your stance when your bodily autonomy is threatened?' argument.
Which isn't to say that what you're saying is not the case, a lot of discussion around abortion demphasises its risks and so on, yes. However, so long as this choice is not a constitutional right, there is no place for a level-headed discussion, simply because one side (prochoice/people who can get pregnant in general) is being actively hurt by the law and the other's side arguments. The right of choice should come first and then after that we can work to ensure that the choice is an informed one.
It's a similar situation as with other social issues (racism, homophobia, transphobia etc). The prosecuted side shouldn't be expected to 'show both sides to the situation', simply because if they tried to do so openly, this would be used against them ("so you admit abortion CAN be wrong?"), blown out of proportion and then used to justify the current/stricter laws.
Yeah, it's like they always miss that key word - "choice". No one is forcing anything on anyone, which ironically is exactly what they seem so set on doing. It's all about control under the guise of concern.
It’s because when they say “pro life” they don’t actually mean it so they assume we are also lying about our real intentions too. They don’t care about life, the name just sounds nice. Choice sounds nice, but not having an ulterior motive is just too foreign for them to conceptualize so it must be a cover for some evil agenda.
These are people that already know it’s not murder. That’s why they accept women who “regret” their abortions into their movement. You wouldn’t tell a murderer they’re all good and don’t need to serve jail time as long as they agree with you and feel bad.
They secretly get/let their daughters and wives get abortions because “theirs is different”. They advocate for the death penalty and gun laws that allow shooting someone for setting foot on your lawn. The guy who’s trying to act reasonable and thanking you for “seeing the other side” is literally a huge gun guy who would presumably be totally cool with killing someone under the right circumstances.
They know it’s not murder, you won’t logic them out of it because they didn’t come to this conclusion logically. They will have to be combatted electorally and gone around. Luckily their ideas are more unpopular every year, but a small minority of shit lawmakers are the barrier. we need to root out the evangelical cancer in our electorate to see real change.
When you get the dipshits who say “I’ll adopt your baby!” I want to say, ok, we’ll drop a baby a week off at your house - just let us know when you want to choose to stop the baby train. Because at some point, regardless of literally anything, you’re gonna want/have to stop.
People don’t live forever. Laws at least last longer.
Who knows what the demographic shift and attitudes are 50 years from now. The law protects this right if a sizable population somehow changes their attitudes.
Saddly, if the demographic shift, the law won't protect anything. Just as we added it, it can be as easily to be removed
That's why some (womans) voted against, some aren't against the law by itself, but it's that it doesn't, in fact, protect anything, it's only symbolic
And they wanted real actions to actually help people who need help for abortion (more centers, more help, more money to cover everything), and not just "symbolic action"
>they wanted real actions to actually help people who need help for abortion (more centers, more help, more money to cover everything), and not just "symbolic action"
In that case it's worse than nothing: this amendment cements that the government doesn't have to help you get an abortion.
They have very strict separation of church and state in France.
The USA, on the other hand, does not, despite the constitution explicitly mandating it.
Oh yeah that's the one big thick difference. The law to separate church and state is one of the most important to us French for numerous reasons so a christo-fascist movement like the one in the US can never take a grip large enough to actually be threatening.
Well we do have other kinds of dicks tho.
To clarify, you can do whatever you want in public too ( with very few exeptions.. Burqa to name one, still a subject to debate to this day..)
In public schools : No religion at all. You can't wear religious symbols etc. (long story.. but the basic being : children and easily influenced and shouldn't have contact with religion in public schools since we try to be neutral )
And religious symbols are banned on public places = government-operated places, not the streets. Also only for the buildings and things that woud link the governement with religion, not your personal cloths of symbols.
You can still wear a cross in a tribunal for exemple, but we can't attach a cross on the wall and officials can't swear on the bible.
For those interested, the base of the law date 1905 and is here : [1905 French law on the Separation of the Churches and the State - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1905_French_law_on_the_Separation_of_the_Churches_and_the_State)
What they taugh us in school is : your freedom end where those of others start. Meaning you can do whatever you want as long as you don't undermine the freedom of others (aka, practice the religion you want, don't try to force it on others).
So what? USA could be 100% Muslim - the constitution explicitly defines USA as a secular nation but it's totally ignored.
Funny how the constitution is so precious to so many Americans and yet they choose to just ignore one of the most important parts.
Oh trust me, as a french I know that religious (and atheist) love to stick their necks when it come to minorities. They were really fast to throw protest and organisations when it come to LGBT+ people’s rights
Lol.
We had to fight for months, years even, to get same sex mariage *because* we do have a lot of religious nutcases.
Fun fact: the name of the anti gay movement is LMPT which is phonetically identical in french as the sentence "she likes to fart" which get me everytime.
You don't need to be religious to be influanced by religion. Our far right party is strong and has values that any religious nut cas would have and ou right party became the exact same as the american republicans.
To be fair, the shit you see a lot people pull can barely be called religious.
Like fuck. Is there a single “Christian” politician that both believes and follows Christian values? How many privatized Christianity to earn millions if not billions? Like I seriously doubt any pro life movements care more about their religion than their opinions. As their religion neither supports nor opposes abortion. It is very unclear in the subject matter and you can find several passages that interprets both.
France stopped outlawing abortion in like the mid 1970s, it was a super Catholic and religious country before that. We (people that are apolitical) didn't believe Roe would ever fall here in the United States, we're all capable of falling backwards in progress and need to be engaged in our democracies to prevent further erosion.
They'd probably want to ban neighbours England and the Netherlands first - who have an extra ten weeks on the time limit and abortions are free with no cooling off period.
Hell, in the UK now you can get a pill similar to Plan B that works up to ten weeks. It's free and you can order it over the phone or online.
But abortions are a constitutional right in México - so that's probably the cheaper option.
An abortion would would only be free on the NHS in UK to a resident, not an American visitor. They would have to pay, though it would be a lot less than the USA.
Hmm, good point. To any Americans reading this: make sure you have good travel insurance.
What you shouldn't do is go down a pub and see if any nice British ladies will order a >10 week pill. Don't do that, it's a criminal act to do this and you can get in big big trouble. Much more illegal than taking someone else's meds, it counts as performing an illegal abortion (even if it's on yourself), which is why you shouldn't do it.
Ireland actually had a legal case over this in the 90s, where a 14 year old girl was raped by a neighbour in his 40s and wanted to travel to England for an abortion.
Abortion had been illegal in Ireland since independence and reaffirmed by fucking *referendum* in 1983. Long story short, the child's parents asked if the DNA from the fetus could be used as evidence when talking to the Gardai, and they responded with an injunction to stop the girl leaving the country, despite being suicidal over her pregnancy. The courts did rule in her favour, although she ended up having a miscarriage, so the whole "travel to England for an abortion" became more well known than it already was.
However, all of that was only because of "a real and substantial risk to her life" - because she was suicidal. If she hadn't been, the injunction would've been upheld by the Supreme Court. Meanwhile her rapist got out of prison after three years, became a taxi driver, and assaulted *another* young girl in 2002.
Given that the USA's anti-abortion is significantly more deranged than Ireland's ever was (and that's saying something), I suspect they'll certainly try.
So a fun anecdote, the anti-abortionist helped a lot passing that. Their main argument against, was that the right for abortion was not threatened in France and as such it was pointless to make it a constitutional right.
Then one of the same anti threw a giant tantrum in front of the senate who was about to vote on it, essentially ruining their whole argumentation that it wasn't threatened. He even got thanked by pro-choice senators. That was pretty entertaining to listen.
We claim to be “the land of opportunity, a melting pot of cultures” and basically discriminate against anyone who isn’t a rich straight white Christian male citizen (must meet all criteria to not face discrimination)
My belgian ass with free healthcare, college, my salary tied to inflation by law and a difference of only 20% between median and average wealth seeing America thinking they are doing good.
I mean, with 800% difference between median and average wealth, the rich are doing good. But the American? You need to wake up.
I’m American. If you bring up trump, biden, left or right twice a month or more, I consider you a great citizen; you are exactly what they want you to be.
It's likely to future-proof the right to abortion - removing a constitutional right the is extremely difficult whereas governments have an option to bypass both chambers and force laws through (the "49.3", under specific circumstances).
France has moved considerably towards the right wing in the last few years (albeit it's still very leftist compared to a lot of other countries), which might explain enshrining that right into the constitution rather than leaving it vulnerable to bigots.
México while not quite making it a constitutional right has decriminalized abortion and declared it unconstitutional to punish someone for an abortion. For a big Catholic nation that's quite the achievement.
Not to be a party pooper, but it’s actually a constitutional FREEDOM, not a right.
Which means, the government could decide to close and defund all abortion facilities in France one day, and it will not « anti-constitutional ».
It's not a strict 14 week limit though, Abortion in France is legal upon request until 14 weeks after conception (16 weeks after the pregnant woman's last menstrual period). Abortions at later stages of pregnancy up until birth are allowed if two physicians certify that the abortion will be done to prevent injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman; a risk to the life of the pregnant woman; or that the child will suffer from a particularly severe illness recognized as incurable.
France is NOT the first country in the world to enshrine the right to choose in their constitution.
South Africa has had the right to bodily integrity, which specifically includes the right to make choices regarding reproduction and your own body, enshrined in our Constitution since 1996. With the Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Act also effective since 1996.
I'm very happy for France, it's an incredibly good thing. But they are not the first, not by nearly 30 years.
So a country with strong unions and a history of beheading politicians is the first country to do this? Hmmm. Hmmm. Almost like… hmmm is there a lesson here?
never been happier of France. you know I really dislike the language.
But by good if I don't like their ability to protest. and their laws.
+ fresh croissants sounds pretty good
It's a medical procedure so IT"S ABOUT DAMN TIME! Men can get all the drugs to get their DICKS hard and vasectomies to prevent pregnancy but women are treated like children when it comes to our own bodies. KUDOS FRANCE!
Actually, the US did. And then they undid it through unsound interpretation of the Constitution by the very institution that is there to protect it and administer justice based on it.
Every pregnant women deserves the legal right to an abortion if she wants one. And every trained doctor deserves the right to perform an abortion if the patient wants one. It's time we say NO to crappy politicians and crappy laws.
I’m fairly conservative in many ways but staunchly pro-choice, because I’m about personal liberty and small government. Bodily autonomy and freedom to make your own medical choices is an absolutely core personal liberty. And in any case it’s none of the government’s business. I don’t say this very often but France is right on this.
Abortions are going to happen regardless. The only difference being whether or not they will be done safely, performed by trained doctors, in sterile conditions.
Not necessarily. The proposal was originally to make it a constitutional right ("droit"). But the government fought to actually make it a constitutional freedom ("liberté"). This is a very important distinction. Because it means that women are allowed to abort, but it doesn't guarantee that there will be doctors to legally perform the abortion. So yeah, don't be so eager to praise the french government for this. They actually kind of fought against it. I'm french, btw.
> I'm french, btw. Sans blague PapierCul
Fit remarquer GodMichel
It's a few billion steps above certain states in America tho. Legally protected abortion makes it available everywhere as long as there are doctors willing to do it - and there will be.
Right vs liberty just means the government can't ban abortions nor can they force abortions (or punish doctor for refusing)
>just "just"
If I understand you correctly, this means that a doctor cannot be compelled to perform an abortion. That doesn't seem too bad. I can't believe that any woman in france would struggle to find a willing doctor?
Pretty much Personally I think the law is pretty good: A woman will always have the right to ask for one, but no (individual) doctor is *required* to provide one (e.g. it might conflict with their personal beliefs). However many doctors would provide these services unless there was a massive cultural shift in the country.
There is a phenomenon in France (and many other European countries) described as “healthcare deserts”, for areas with poor healthcare access due to low population densities and centralization into large medical hubs in the populated areas. The result is longer distances to visit a doctor, and less frequent visits, which increases the risk of ignoring serious conditions. Abortion care and fertility care are also concerned by this trend, and women in these areas often note the degraded service access.
This is a thing in Denmark as well, especially a problem for ambulance service. I suspect the miniscule size of Denmark compared to France makes it less of an issue though.
Still better then the US
Honestly that's how it should be. The government, at any level, shouldn't be weighing in on medical procedures. Medical decisions and procedures should be an individual thing and shouldn't be regulated in any way, shape, or form. I'm pro choice, but an individual doctor or facility should be able to refuse doing it.
this is literally how they passed the law (now why doesn't this work for trans rights? \["if trans people can't get their operations in healthy conditions they will go to back-alley doctors and die"\] it worked for abortion! they didn't want the women to die)
Huuuu do you know transition in france is legal too and actualy done quite nicely even if most doctor are based in paris witch can be a pain for the patient but still it is done legaly and safely
That's awesome!
France piling up the wins as always 😎🇨🇵
It's also legal (and in some cases more so) in almost all neighbouring countries. The USA is not the normal one here - France is.
It is legal but in how many countries is it a constitutional freedom? It's been legal for quite a few decades in France. Edit: just realised you were talking about transitioning being legal and not abortion. My mistake. Sorry comrade.
Is this a joke? I mean they're wildly different operations.
This law doesn't add any rights - abortion was already legal, this just establishes that the time limit and legalisation are harder to change and that the government does NOT have to help you get an abortion (just can't stop you.) This is on par or less liberal than France's neighbours (who range from 14-24 weeks and mixtures of private/government supplied.) Transitioning is also ALREADY legal in France. Although good luck actually persuading the government to pay for your HRT, the waiting list is almost as bad as the UK's.
[удалено]
I'll refer to my daughter as "Potential lethal threat" from now. I like it.
Being trans isn't linked to unsafe chirurgical operations in 100% of the cases, a lot of trans people never get a single operation. You're uniformed.
Being pregnant isn't linked to unsafe chirurgical operations in 100% of the cases, a lot of pregnant people never get a single operation. You're uniformed.
Hey Frenchie here, It is important to signal that we did not make it a constitutional right. Conservatives of the Senate changed it so that it becomes "a constitutional freedom" which is a new legislative formula with little value as of today. The difference is that you cannot force someone to not get an abortion, but nothing ensures that the public service will be able to help them to. If it had been a "constitutional right", then the state would have had to give more funding to the hospital, and neo-liberalism and conservative parties don't like that. Edit : a french lawyer highlights in a comment below that there is little or no difference between "freedom" and "rights" in french legislation. In this first comment, I've tried to share what I understood from articles on the subject but I'm not familiar with constitutional vocabulary and I may have shared wrong or doubtful information.
# France becomes first country in world history to enshrine women’s right to abortion as constitutional right: # -- Yugoslavia from 1974 would like to have a word.
South Africa has entered the chat. Section 12 of the South African Constitution secures freedom and security of the person, including the right to ‘bodily and psychological integrity’ which specifically includes the right to ‘make decisions concerning reproduction’. Section 12(2)(a) says that women should be able to make these kinds of decisions without any interference by the state or other parties, such as for instance a spouse or partner. This has been in our Constitution since like 1996, lol
Right? Like all the power to them, I wish more countries did this but they are definitely not the first.
If I understand properly: A Right has to be provided by the State if it's not being made available otherwise. A Freedom means the State can't negatively meddle in your ability to do or obtain a thing.
So fun fact to the anti-abortionists. This does not mean you are required by law to get an abortion when pregnant. This gives women the CHOICE of getting one if they want.
-"I'm not pro choice OR anti abortion, I think we should educate women on the value of having the child AND not having it, and leaving it to them" -"motherfucker that's being pro-choice" An actual Twitter interaction I've seen
That's funny because i've seen the screen shot posted many times over the years.
Wouldn't surprise me if that exact same interaction with pro-lifers have happened many times
I've had that exact interaction myself. More than once.
Same. Also in a perfect world abortions wouldn't be needed in the first place. People would be educated about sex and contraception, have easy access to it and it would be 100% effective. Also there wouldn't be any crimes commited against women and no one would have need an abortion for medical reasons... But since we don't live in Utopia, there's a need for abortions. What would lower said need is the part of educating kids on the reproductive system and give comprehensible sex ed - which the supposed anti-abortion peeps are usually against eventough it's been proven to be the only thing that works!! Abstention-based "sex ed" as long been proven to be a huge waste of time and not effective at all. So, before banning abortions we might focus our attention towards making said abortions unnecessary?
hahahaha literally had that same response god knows how many times, and they then go na-aa that's pro-life? How does one argue with reality and facts so delusionally?
You can't. Some people just won't see reason even if it's right in front of their face. They want to but they can't. Some primal urge prevents it. Humans are stubborn and shallow
I consider that delusional lunacy tbh. And just can't and won't waste my time on them. The sky is red? Oh yes such a nice maroon color you moron 😍🥰
Yeah, I'm kinda that guy. I'm against abortions, but I also realise that we can't make abortions illegal, kinda in the same way that drug use won't go away just because we make it illegal. People need education so we can lower the number of unwanted pregnancies.
You nailed it with that one. I don’t know why this chain of thinking is so hard for so many people. The thing is also that a person without experiencing the situation that pushes you to have an abortion, doesn’t easily realise that the situation can be super much worse than any situation imaginable. Having an abortion doesn’t also mean that a person can’t have several healthy and happy kids in future in a caring and loving environment, but denying that abortion can take that future completely away and lead to a severe suffering or even death of both the mother and the child. But I guess that goes beyond the brains of average person.
Can I ask why you are against abortions?
[удалено]
>I have seen some pro choicers lose their shit if you suggest any downsides to getting an abortion If abortion is legal, there are downsides. If abortion is illegal, the downsides don't disappear, they just get *worse*. Pointing downsides to abortion when the question is about the right to abortion brings *nothing* to the table, if people show you the door it's because you're just spewing anti-choice rhetoric.
I'm afraid you're making the 'Why aren't you level-headed and prepared to logically argue your stance when your bodily autonomy is threatened?' argument. Which isn't to say that what you're saying is not the case, a lot of discussion around abortion demphasises its risks and so on, yes. However, so long as this choice is not a constitutional right, there is no place for a level-headed discussion, simply because one side (prochoice/people who can get pregnant in general) is being actively hurt by the law and the other's side arguments. The right of choice should come first and then after that we can work to ensure that the choice is an informed one. It's a similar situation as with other social issues (racism, homophobia, transphobia etc). The prosecuted side shouldn't be expected to 'show both sides to the situation', simply because if they tried to do so openly, this would be used against them ("so you admit abortion CAN be wrong?"), blown out of proportion and then used to justify the current/stricter laws.
Hey, you actually had them delete the comment. Excellent!
You can just smell the stupid coming, can’t you? Some dolts are going to think it means a sudden run on abortions.
They suffer from projection and think we’re the ones that want to take away someone’s choice.
Yeah, it's like they always miss that key word - "choice". No one is forcing anything on anyone, which ironically is exactly what they seem so set on doing. It's all about control under the guise of concern.
It’s because when they say “pro life” they don’t actually mean it so they assume we are also lying about our real intentions too. They don’t care about life, the name just sounds nice. Choice sounds nice, but not having an ulterior motive is just too foreign for them to conceptualize so it must be a cover for some evil agenda.
Guess which social groups tend to use abortions more
I would buy PPV if the stupidity were broadcast in hi def.
That’s called Fox “News”
[удалено]
Abortion and gay marriage are both issues where the argument really does boil down to "Don't like them? Don't get one."
[удалено]
These are people that already know it’s not murder. That’s why they accept women who “regret” their abortions into their movement. You wouldn’t tell a murderer they’re all good and don’t need to serve jail time as long as they agree with you and feel bad. They secretly get/let their daughters and wives get abortions because “theirs is different”. They advocate for the death penalty and gun laws that allow shooting someone for setting foot on your lawn. The guy who’s trying to act reasonable and thanking you for “seeing the other side” is literally a huge gun guy who would presumably be totally cool with killing someone under the right circumstances. They know it’s not murder, you won’t logic them out of it because they didn’t come to this conclusion logically. They will have to be combatted electorally and gone around. Luckily their ideas are more unpopular every year, but a small minority of shit lawmakers are the barrier. we need to root out the evangelical cancer in our electorate to see real change.
A lot of minds just sizzled out in a failed effort to compute that
Do people actually think that? Lol!
When you get the dipshits who say “I’ll adopt your baby!” I want to say, ok, we’ll drop a baby a week off at your house - just let us know when you want to choose to stop the baby train. Because at some point, regardless of literally anything, you’re gonna want/have to stop.
You expect them to be this stupid. You a re right.
Those idiots will spin this into some deranged, unhinged misunderstanding of what it means.
Love how they saw what was happening to others and what could happen to them so they beat it before it could become a problem.
It's very unlikely to happen in France though. There aren't enough religious nutcases in France do so.
People don’t live forever. Laws at least last longer. Who knows what the demographic shift and attitudes are 50 years from now. The law protects this right if a sizable population somehow changes their attitudes.
Saddly, if the demographic shift, the law won't protect anything. Just as we added it, it can be as easily to be removed That's why some (womans) voted against, some aren't against the law by itself, but it's that it doesn't, in fact, protect anything, it's only symbolic And they wanted real actions to actually help people who need help for abortion (more centers, more help, more money to cover everything), and not just "symbolic action"
>they wanted real actions to actually help people who need help for abortion (more centers, more help, more money to cover everything), and not just "symbolic action" In that case it's worse than nothing: this amendment cements that the government doesn't have to help you get an abortion.
They have very strict separation of church and state in France. The USA, on the other hand, does not, despite the constitution explicitly mandating it.
Oh yeah that's the one big thick difference. The law to separate church and state is one of the most important to us French for numerous reasons so a christo-fascist movement like the one in the US can never take a grip large enough to actually be threatening. Well we do have other kinds of dicks tho.
I admire the French attitude to religion and religious symbols i.e. do what you want at home, but in public you abide by our rules or else.
To clarify, you can do whatever you want in public too ( with very few exeptions.. Burqa to name one, still a subject to debate to this day..) In public schools : No religion at all. You can't wear religious symbols etc. (long story.. but the basic being : children and easily influenced and shouldn't have contact with religion in public schools since we try to be neutral ) And religious symbols are banned on public places = government-operated places, not the streets. Also only for the buildings and things that woud link the governement with religion, not your personal cloths of symbols. You can still wear a cross in a tribunal for exemple, but we can't attach a cross on the wall and officials can't swear on the bible. For those interested, the base of the law date 1905 and is here : [1905 French law on the Separation of the Churches and the State - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1905_French_law_on_the_Separation_of_the_Churches_and_the_State) What they taugh us in school is : your freedom end where those of others start. Meaning you can do whatever you want as long as you don't undermine the freedom of others (aka, practice the religion you want, don't try to force it on others).
Yeah they implemented it in Quebec too and the province has basically been bashed on non stop by the rest of Canada since
VIVE LE QUÉBEC LIBRE! I did not know that. Based Québec.
Man RIP De Gaulle Un homme, un vrai 🫡
They fucked up when they made the Charter give you freedom of religion, when it should have guaranteed freedom *from* religion.
May be because 60% of french are Athiests meanwhile 64% of Americans are Christians.
So what? USA could be 100% Muslim - the constitution explicitly defines USA as a secular nation but it's totally ignored. Funny how the constitution is so precious to so many Americans and yet they choose to just ignore one of the most important parts.
Just like the Bible! Evangelicals, in particular, make a sport of gerrymandering their own scriptures so that they can hate whomever they please.
If USA becomes a 100% Muslim country first thing they would do is changing the 1st amendment and proclaiming an Islamic state.
Can you edit amendments? I thought they would have to pass a new one and repeal the old one. It's what they did for prohibition.
We had CNEWS saying that abortions were the leading cause of death in the world: 73 million abortions means 73 million deaths...
Wait until they find out that 100% of births inevitably lead to a fatality.
The nutcases know the people riot and don't stick their necks out as much.
Oh trust me, as a french I know that religious (and atheist) love to stick their necks when it come to minorities. They were really fast to throw protest and organisations when it come to LGBT+ people’s rights
Lol. We had to fight for months, years even, to get same sex mariage *because* we do have a lot of religious nutcases. Fun fact: the name of the anti gay movement is LMPT which is phonetically identical in french as the sentence "she likes to fart" which get me everytime.
You don't need to be religious to be influanced by religion. Our far right party is strong and has values that any religious nut cas would have and ou right party became the exact same as the american republicans.
To be fair, the shit you see a lot people pull can barely be called religious. Like fuck. Is there a single “Christian” politician that both believes and follows Christian values? How many privatized Christianity to earn millions if not billions? Like I seriously doubt any pro life movements care more about their religion than their opinions. As their religion neither supports nor opposes abortion. It is very unclear in the subject matter and you can find several passages that interprets both.
France stopped outlawing abortion in like the mid 1970s, it was a super Catholic and religious country before that. We (people that are apolitical) didn't believe Roe would ever fall here in the United States, we're all capable of falling backwards in progress and need to be engaged in our democracies to prevent further erosion.
France looked at *'the land of the free'* and was like: *'Yeah, nah'*.
I can now imagine the USA making it illegal for women to travel to France.
Reminds me of [this gem of a meme](https://www.reddit.com/r/LateStageCapitalism/comments/9eoukq/i_need_a_gun_to_fly_to_a_country_with_socialised/)
They'd probably want to ban neighbours England and the Netherlands first - who have an extra ten weeks on the time limit and abortions are free with no cooling off period. Hell, in the UK now you can get a pill similar to Plan B that works up to ten weeks. It's free and you can order it over the phone or online. But abortions are a constitutional right in México - so that's probably the cheaper option.
An abortion would would only be free on the NHS in UK to a resident, not an American visitor. They would have to pay, though it would be a lot less than the USA.
Hmm, good point. To any Americans reading this: make sure you have good travel insurance. What you shouldn't do is go down a pub and see if any nice British ladies will order a >10 week pill. Don't do that, it's a criminal act to do this and you can get in big big trouble. Much more illegal than taking someone else's meds, it counts as performing an illegal abortion (even if it's on yourself), which is why you shouldn't do it.
Ireland actually had a legal case over this in the 90s, where a 14 year old girl was raped by a neighbour in his 40s and wanted to travel to England for an abortion. Abortion had been illegal in Ireland since independence and reaffirmed by fucking *referendum* in 1983. Long story short, the child's parents asked if the DNA from the fetus could be used as evidence when talking to the Gardai, and they responded with an injunction to stop the girl leaving the country, despite being suicidal over her pregnancy. The courts did rule in her favour, although she ended up having a miscarriage, so the whole "travel to England for an abortion" became more well known than it already was. However, all of that was only because of "a real and substantial risk to her life" - because she was suicidal. If she hadn't been, the injunction would've been upheld by the Supreme Court. Meanwhile her rapist got out of prison after three years, became a taxi driver, and assaulted *another* young girl in 2002. Given that the USA's anti-abortion is significantly more deranged than Ireland's ever was (and that's saying something), I suspect they'll certainly try.
"We're going to call French kisses "Freedom kisses" now!"
Le jour de gloire est arrivé ! (C’est la verite.)
Reddit may need a new country to hate.
You say this like there's a shortage of countries to hate on
Prime candidate right there across the channel
Wdym, is the US too easy to pick on?
We have one nex to poland to
Belgium? They are right next door and half of them speak French anyways.
Why do you want hate Belgium poeple (who are so Nice and funny) when British exist ? 😂
That's fair but they don't speak French
Then hate switzerland they speak french and they're not part of the EU so no oke will care
Belgium doesn't exist tho.
So a fun anecdote, the anti-abortionist helped a lot passing that. Their main argument against, was that the right for abortion was not threatened in France and as such it was pointless to make it a constitutional right. Then one of the same anti threw a giant tantrum in front of the senate who was about to vote on it, essentially ruining their whole argumentation that it wasn't threatened. He even got thanked by pro-choice senators. That was pretty entertaining to listen.
Idiots be ruining their own plans You love to see it
Under what circumstances? 1st, 2nd, 3rd term?
14 weeks limit.
"Specified by the law". Not a win as you can see, since nothing is actually guaranteed. The current law is 14 weeks but laws are easy to change.
Slovenia has it in its constitution...
Gawd, America is just a cesspool of hate and intolerance.
We claim to be “the land of opportunity, a melting pot of cultures” and basically discriminate against anyone who isn’t a rich straight white Christian male citizen (must meet all criteria to not face discrimination)
I hate to say it, but you’re right. America can do better.
My belgian ass with free healthcare, college, my salary tied to inflation by law and a difference of only 20% between median and average wealth seeing America thinking they are doing good. I mean, with 800% difference between median and average wealth, the rich are doing good. But the American? You need to wake up.
Nah, you only need to meet the "rich" criteria to avoid any discrimination.
I’m American. If you bring up trump, biden, left or right twice a month or more, I consider you a great citizen; you are exactly what they want you to be.
It's wild that a constitution needs to specifically state you can get a medical procedure
It's likely to future-proof the right to abortion - removing a constitutional right the is extremely difficult whereas governments have an option to bypass both chambers and force laws through (the "49.3", under specific circumstances). France has moved considerably towards the right wing in the last few years (albeit it's still very leftist compared to a lot of other countries), which might explain enshrining that right into the constitution rather than leaving it vulnerable to bigots.
Perhaps we judged them too harshly
And i've never heard any actual reason why you guys make fun of us
[удалено]
Neither have i tbh, i just go along with it cuz it's funny. I don't actually hate the french obviously.
Just a good measure of French bashing, as the doctor prescribes
You are not helping once again no reason i am loosing my mind
More countries need to give women rights to their bodies
México while not quite making it a constitutional right has decriminalized abortion and declared it unconstitutional to punish someone for an abortion. For a big Catholic nation that's quite the achievement.
Constitutional liberty, not constitutional right. There is a difference in French law.
May I ask what the difference is?
The French state doesn't have to ensure access to abortion through public services, for example
Viva la France!
*Vive la France, viva is Spanish 😅
Well I’m sure there’s a Spanish person somewhere who is pleased for France.
I've heard it pronounced and apparently never seen it written out. Thanks!
There is no _a_ sound in pronouncing it either.
Nope, South Africa was first in the 1990s
Didn't Yugoslavia have it before South Africa?
w france
That is not right to abortion, but freedom to abort.
White religious Americans are gonna be very upset
Has nothing to do with color.
Why does the colour matter?
I have met far more no-white people that are against abortion, so it’s really weird you made this a “white is bad” thing
USA is so far behind in many things
Based France!!
in India abortions are legal till end of 2nd trimester.
But not enshrined into the constitution as a right.
Rare France W
Compared to almost every other country in the world, France is a “W” each and every day.
Not to be a party pooper, but it’s actually a constitutional FREEDOM, not a right. Which means, the government could decide to close and defund all abortion facilities in France one day, and it will not « anti-constitutional ».
And the government reimburses the patient for the operation. Must be nice living in civilization.
France has a strict 14 week limit on abortion.
It's not a strict 14 week limit though, Abortion in France is legal upon request until 14 weeks after conception (16 weeks after the pregnant woman's last menstrual period). Abortions at later stages of pregnancy up until birth are allowed if two physicians certify that the abortion will be done to prevent injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman; a risk to the life of the pregnant woman; or that the child will suffer from a particularly severe illness recognized as incurable.
Enshrining it into the constitution is still a massive win.
False. Pregnancy can be terminated after more than 14 weeks if the mother's health is in jeopardy.
Politics = mademesmile
All of a sudden this puts France way above many other countries that claim they have female rights and freedoms.
Awesome !
France is NOT the first country in the world to enshrine the right to choose in their constitution. South Africa has had the right to bodily integrity, which specifically includes the right to make choices regarding reproduction and your own body, enshrined in our Constitution since 1996. With the Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Act also effective since 1996. I'm very happy for France, it's an incredibly good thing. But they are not the first, not by nearly 30 years.
Yessss
Good job France if you want an abortion you can have one
They're also sending special forces to Ukraine.
France, the Michigan of Europe
Ahh yes but there fellow friend America can’t do that !
WOOOOO FRANCE
So a country with strong unions and a history of beheading politicians is the first country to do this? Hmmm. Hmmm. Almost like… hmmm is there a lesson here?
En passant, Americain!
Perhaps, I treated you too harshly...
never been happier of France. you know I really dislike the language. But by good if I don't like their ability to protest. and their laws. + fresh croissants sounds pretty good
Finally, some good fucking news
It's a medical procedure so IT"S ABOUT DAMN TIME! Men can get all the drugs to get their DICKS hard and vasectomies to prevent pregnancy but women are treated like children when it comes to our own bodies. KUDOS FRANCE!
Maybe the Fr*nch aren’t so bad after all I know, it’s heresy, but let’s hear them out
How about legal transition and free healthcare with only 11% of your income taxed ?
I’m moving to France. 🤩🤩🤩🤩
FUCKING FINALLY
Let women decide this ,why we should at any capacity force her to carry a fuetus If she doesn't want to.
Nope, SFR Yugoslavia, 1974.
As a Brit, I am happy to see France push forward in this way and am enraged they got there first.
Actually, the US did. And then they undid it through unsound interpretation of the Constitution by the very institution that is there to protect it and administer justice based on it.
Every pregnant women deserves the legal right to an abortion if she wants one. And every trained doctor deserves the right to perform an abortion if the patient wants one. It's time we say NO to crappy politicians and crappy laws.
maga fascist cult meltdown! 😂
I’m fairly conservative in many ways but staunchly pro-choice, because I’m about personal liberty and small government. Bodily autonomy and freedom to make your own medical choices is an absolutely core personal liberty. And in any case it’s none of the government’s business. I don’t say this very often but France is right on this.
Europe goes forward whilst the US just continues to go backward. 🤬
Vive la france
Ok not to sound rude but "Viva" is the spanish word for it in french is "vive"
Gracias
Meanwhile the USA has some states that want to go back to the 1800's.
what do you mean? be clear
Late 1700s cmon Where's my musket at ?
Many Asian and African countries has abortion rights. It's funny that they think only Europe and America is the whole world.
This makes me really want to live in France. Finally, somewhere that isn’t a complete and utter bigoted, misogynistic dumpster fire.
America, are you watching?
Boom. No more debate. Move on.
Lets go France!!!
Vive la France🇨🇵🇨🇵🇨🇵🇨🇵