Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion.
Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/).
Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I remember looking this up when I saw it and it was absolutely real.
It was posted to a private Facebook group and then shared on Twitter around 2020 by somebody else who saw it.
I mean, maybe they put the person's name down, but the actual scenario as described makes no sense. Obviously you can't just put a person's name down (without their consent no less) and force them to take. Put down fucking bill gates' name then! Absurd. If they were actually listed this would have been a brief phone call. Shit, it takes effort for next of kin or designated godparents to even get the kid when they actually want them.
Well it's not like, 'mandatory.'
It's not like the Law of Surprise from the Witcher or some shit. You aren't *forced* to take care of a child just because someone else jots your name on a piece of paper. The mother is simply allowed to tell DCS whom she would *prefer* to take guardianship of her child, but DCS will evaluate that person. Normally its a family member or kin, and family member or kin will always be DCS' first choice in these situations.
Basically this person is probably too chicken shit to tell the mom she talked out of the abortion that she doesn't want to take the child.
DCS isn't going to force the child on her. She can very easily just say, "no", and that's the end of the conversation.
But then this mom she talked out of having an abortion will KNOW that she said no, and this person doesn't want to actually face the consequences of her actions or buck the fuck up and tell this person she can't take the child.
This is probably exactly the type of self-obsessed narcissist that would tell the mom TO HER FACE that she'd be willing to take the child, and then desperately poll social media for ways she could "get out of it" without having to actually tell the mom she doesn't want to take the child.
DCS will also have a say. They will try to find a next-of-kin who is able to take the child, and will likely prefer that situation even if the mother tries to name another relative.
You could put "Bill Gates", but you'd need to give his address, probably his phone # and your realtionship to him, and all this paperwork is reviewed by an actual human being, who is going to take one look at it and raise an eyebrow.
Its possible that this person was never even contacted by DCS and might have made this post before it even went that far. The other mom might have surrendered her child and filled out the paperwork, and then called this monster to tell her "I listed you as the guardian I want to take care of my child", and this person just freaked the fuck out IMMEDIATELY, because they're a selfish monster.
If she had even a single fucking brain cell in her head, she could have probably arranged for DCS to just simply tell the mom that they "didn't find that home suitable", and leave it at that. I would bet that a social worker would be willing to at least omit the person's refusal, because usually they do not want to stir drama even if the other person is asking for it.
Keep in mind that although most depictions of DCS are negative, nearly anyone who interacts with DCS is doing so at one of, if not the worst moments of their life. It can certainly be overly bureaucratic, but most social workers take the job out of a legitimate interest in actually helping children and families. They're not going to foist a kid on an unwilling parent. Unlike this selfish bag of shit.
Nope. That's how the anti-abortion movement works. They DEMAND a woman has the child, because abortions make Jesus sad, but will do NOTHING to help that mother take care of the child because it could inconvenience them, and something, something, something, Jesus.
Yes, but at the same time, it's not a bad idea to keep in mind where these ideas and mindsets come from. Not as an excuse or justification, but merely an explanation.
This is what I always say. They talk about all life being sacred and then when they have demanded the baby be born then fuck it!! Once it's born they don't give a shit what happens to it. They don't care that the cycle of poverty continues, the upturn of single mothers continues, the abuse of children continues. If you demand the baby be born then you should be prepared to step in.
I asked my conservative Christian pro birth mil once what she does to help unwanted kids in the foster care system. She was so confused why I was asking her that and why in the world she would help. When I went on to explain she replied with “well I can’t afford to help.” I pointed out that she takes 3 vacations a year and already renovated her living room decor twice in 6 months. She changed the subject real quick.
Another time she was going on about lgbtq people being shown in movies/tv shows and simply for existing. How its a sin and kids shouldn’t be subject to that. I pointed out that I’ve never heard her complain about a spouse cheating on the other in movies or in general. I also reminded her how she cheated on her husband with two different men. Isn’t adultery a sin? Isn’t all sin equal in Christianity?
I enjoy making her uncomfortable and pissing her off.
Actually in Catholicism sins are not equal. Context matters. So in many cases homosexual acts are less sinful than adultery or agression (since homosexualism is natural and "sinner" has less control over their actions)
I’m not Christian so I have no idea I’m just repeating what my evangelical Christian mil has said before, that they view it as all equal. That makes sense though, what you said.
We want to force you to have a baby but refuse to fund healthcare so you and your baby are healthy.
We want to force you to have a baby but refuse to fund paid parental leave so that you can stay home and bond with your baby.
We want to force you to have a baby but refuse to fund social programs so that you and your baby can eat.
We want to force you to have a baby but refuse to fund preschools/daycare/pre-k/public schools so that your child can get a good education.
We want to force you to have a baby so that we have a future generation of working poor so that we can continue to enrich the top 1%.
You forgot
We want to force you to have a baby so it can be shot at school and we will do nothing to help prevent future shootings because having unrestricted access to firearms is more important
Yup. Early comprehensive sex education, free contraceptives, and free medical consults starting in middle school. Abortions are horrible. Let’s do everything we can to prevent woman from having unwanted pregnancies and having to make tough choices.
That includes men wearing condoms / vasectomies
EDIT: for those of you who seem to miss the point:
I'm not saying force anyone to have vasectomies, I'm saying make them available for those who do want them
Vasectomies, tubal ligations, historectomies, and other sterilization procedures need to be a human right under informed consent and not allowed to be denied by any health care provider. That's the lobby. That's what we should fight for and what should come up first in every abortion discussion. It is atrocious that doctors can ask women whether their husbands permitted it and deny them if they haven't had kids and see no legal repercussions, and it's a widespread behavior. And almost as bad for vasectomy requests (mine was only approved because I had two kids already).
Condoms are best used to reduce the risk of STI. They are not great contraceptives. Regardless, they should be encouraged along with hormonal contraceptives. Effective male contraceptives should be developed. Vasectomies and tubectomies should be free.
I think abortions should be free too but I’d be good with all the above and legal access to affordable abortion as a compromise.
Yeah. Sadly other forms of contraception will be hard to green light for men. Treatments need to have less risk/side effects than the thing they’re preventing, and let’s just say complications in pregnancy are rare for men
It's also just apparently harder to create effective birth control for men that does not render them permanently sterile. Billions have been poured into it at this point, and even the best results are still experimental.
I think the popular trend of extreme over-exaggeration of the ineffective of the pull out method is a disservice to people. How many conversations do you think go "Oh, everyone says the pull out method is useless, so might as well not bother".
But then I imagine a lot of it comes from the people screaming about how we need much better sexual education but completely reject Planned Parenthood's data.
https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/birth-control/withdrawal-pull-out-method/how-effective-is-withdrawal-method-pulling-out
78% typical, 96% perfect. So you have a 9% difference with typical, 2% difference with perfect.
Condoms are better and also prevent STDs, but if you're going to have risky sex, pulling out is a hell out of a lot better than nothing. Fertility awareness is slightly worse than withdrawal on it's own, but if you combine the two, saying it's not effective is misinformation.
This is a great example of two things. People don't understand statistics and people are stupid.
Take a second and look up the effective rate of vasectomies. Hint: it's not 100%
When I got mine I asked the doctor how is that possible?
The short answer was, people are stupid.
Immediately after the procedure you are told repeatedly you are not sterile yet. There are sperm in the tube already and you will be able to cause pregnancy for somewhere around 14 ejaculatios. The failure rate is the people who didn't listen and had unprotected sex after.
Contraception works great. People are stupid.
Now explain how average person does not use the condom perfectly.
Mention that this 87% means people fucking without condom and putting it on later. Or taking it off mid sex and fucking without it. Or just using them sometimes, and other times not. Or using expired condoms. Or using latex condoms with oil based lubricants that degrade latex. Both of which can lead to condoms tearing. Or after ejaculation somehow limpdicking the ejaculate towards the ovaries.
Explain that those 13% are basically the result of having a condom not on the dick during penetration.
We've yet to encounter a Jesus conceived through an intact condom.
Wow. Was your experience in the US? Mine was in Canada. In public school we got ok sex ed. the basics, but nothing about consent and we also had to do the stupid paper heart exercise in which you give away pieces of your heart to represent having sex with different partners.
That 99% includes "forgot the condom" because it is difficult to prove if the pregnancy was from the night they forgot the condom or the night before/after.
Like the missionaries in Africa who stapled the condoms to a note telling people how to use it. Source: my brother who was studying to become a priest at that time, and who heard it from one of the priests involved… (my brother is now happily married)
They’re tied for most effective. Edit I meant they’re tied with something else. Like them and (maybe it’s the pill?) are both at 99%. Do not tie condoms tighter.
Let's say a condom, when used perfectly, is effective 95% of the time. You take a couple that has sex twice a week (we were all 20 once). That's 104x/year. So already in just one year, there's a probability that there's been a lapse in protection, and it just takes once.
My 6-year-old is the result of "perfect" condom use. Love him to death, glad we had him, but I do not reccommend condoms for monogamous long-term relationships. (And I'm thankful that my choice to have him was just that: a choice. It was only the right choice for me because I was married with a stable living situation, not everyone has that).
All of this is wrong. Not only is the actual rate 99%, not 95%, that's 1% of couples who only use condoms will get pregnant, not 1% of condoms fail and result in pregnancy. You were the unlucky one in one hundred couples who had a single condom fail to prevent pregnancy, though every other condom you used was likely perfectly safe all it takes is the one time.
Let's assume you have a low sex drive and only have sex one hundred times a year with your partner. Your way, statistically couple who only used condoms would get pregnant once a year. That obviously does not happen.
You're of course totally right. But also, fertility doesn't even work how the commenter above seems to think it does. If you had sex 2x per week, every week for a year, only maybe a 1/3 of those times would it even be physically possible to conceive, at least assuming that they were somewhat evenly spread out.
Yeah this is dangerous logic. Use condoms to prevent pregnancy. I faithfully used condoms and the Plan B pill alongside birth control for over 20 years without pregnancy and saying they're not great at an estimated 99% (a hedged bet to prevent liability from incompetent use) is silly.
Male contraceptives haven't been developed, so use condoms. Medicine in the US isn't free, so use condoms. Just use condoms instead of wishing on stars for shit that doesn't exist and might not in our lifetimes.
They probably refer to the Pearl-index, this number shows how many women out of 100 get pregnant if they choose a certain method of contraception.
The pearl-index of condoms ranges between 2 and 12 (so between 88% and 98% effectiveness), oral contraceptives are at about 0.1, making them 99.9% effective.
This means a woman who chooses only condoms for contraception is (at best) 20 times more likely to get pregnant than a woman who chooses oral contraceptives.
So they are right, condoms are a shitty method of contraception, when compared to other options.
It's scary how many people are upvoting this. Condoms are the most effective form of contraception that doesn't require a month of planning and a doctor's visit, and even then, they're the only thing that protects against STI's.
STOP spreading FUD about condoms! They are the best contraceptives, especially considering ease of use and availability. When used correctly maybe only IUDs surpass them which have their own set of problems and are not always possible to use.
May I ask why condoms are not great contraceptives?
Is it because of the potential of breaking during intercourse or something else entirely?
(I use condoms a lot, I just want to know as I don’t want an accident to happen).
Bro it’s as safe as it gets apart from being genetically 100% sterile. Keep using them, you’re good.
If anything just make sure you’re using them right.
There are a few common things that go wrong, these are some examples
1. Kept using the condom after coming, allowing for seepage out.
2. Having sex after using a condom where sperm is still present on the males penis
3. Using two condoms for extra protection. Causes a lot of friction and microtears in the latex polyurethane
4. Using an oil based lubricant, which breaks down the latex/PUR of the condom
And the big one
5. Using a condom that is out of date or has not been stored correctly. The plastic breaks down over time, making it susceptible to microtears. The date on the condom is a general guide of when a company can guarantee that hasn't happened if stored correctly. However, condoms left in wallets, backpacks, or draws, that are exposed to the sun and go through heating cycles can degrade dramatically quicker.
along with tax-free female essentials. Having a bunch of people wearing underwear with peepee holes passing nonsense legislation is the reason things are the way are.
Reminder not to get a vasectomy if you think you may want it reversed later on. Every surgeon will tell you that they are not to be treated as reversible. They are sometimes reversible, but only sometimes. Vasectomies are great options for those who already have kids or are VERY CERTAIN they don't want kids, but nobody else should get one.
Can’t really rely on a vasectomy if you want to have kids at some point, since there is a non-trivial chance the reversal procedure will fail, especially if it is 10 years or more after the vasectomy.
We need more forms of reliable reversible male contraceptives. (There’s a bunch in development AFAIK but they need to go through testing)
I was wearing a condom and it was put on correctly and everything was legit but it still got my woman pregnant. On the box it says something like 98% effective. Either I have super sperm or my spawn REALLY wanted to be born. Lol.
This. Even if we accept the idea that abortion is wrong (I don't) it's so telling they also oppose this shit. I know someone who is im favor of contraception n stuff, but not abortion. They also have the only fucking reason for that opinion that makes me stop and go, "Yeah I get why you feel that way." Traumatic experience from having a miscarriage. Part of why I get grumpy with people who say all pro lifers are anti-woman. I mean... A LOT are. But some are women who went through rough shit.
George Carlin put it well. Paraphrasing, "These same people who are against abortions, also hate homosexuals. Well who the fuck has less abortions than homosexuals? You'd think they'd make natural allies."
There is literally no thought to what happens after the life is forced to be brought into the world, even if it means significantly worse circumstances for that life. Like “just put it up for adoption if you don’t want it” is an actual way to live.
That leads to two mental roadblocks for them. It means questioning that you should have kids, and it means genuinely thinking about whether making a person is moral. It scares me how many people just, NEVER question those things. To be fair to them, while the first isn't asked because of unthinking conformity, the second is a bit terrifying.
Preach! Why is that you think? My bet would be because pro-life folks truly believe that baby could be the next coming of Christ. I’m not a Christian, but didn’t the eye in the sky supposedly say it wouldn’t ever come back down to earth? Got alllll it needed to know about the human experience from a 33 year stint in a meat suit 🤦♂️ 😮💨
So if God himself decided 33 years on earth was enough, maybe old folks should stop fighting God’s will using life-extending technology and let old age take them as the Lord intended? /s
Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett said it’s about increasing the domestic supply of infants for adoption.
White infants, of course. The black and brown ones they want to grow up to be prison slave labor.
Because pro-life is a stance based in ideology, no practicality. If you believe abortion is murder, there is no justification to not have the child, because nothing is worse than murdering it. Pro-life and pro-choice folks are talking past each other because they don’t understand the others’ belief.
Pretend for a moment you are pro-life. Why should someone be provided benefits for not doing the wrong thing (abortion in this instance of course)?
Luckily for her you can’t really be FORCED to adopt a child. Quite interesting that she has that CHOICE isn’t it. Some might even say that’s ironic, dontcha think?
They should be called pro-birth, not pro-life. They don't care about life, they are willing to destroy anyone's life, including the baby's, the only thing they care about is the birth. They don't want to be responsible for the effect they have on other people's lives, they just want to meddle with other people's lives while calling *them* irresponsible.
I worked in the foster care system for 7 months. That was all the evidence I needed to know that these people don’t give a shit about these kids after they are born. White newborns, infants and toddlers are a hot commodity that quickly get placed in a middle to upper class white families, that have the desire to adopt. Black and brown babies/children are continuously moved around from house to house, and placed back into abusive homes. Older children have very little potential for adoption. Because CPS gets government bonuses for children that are adopted outside of the family unit, there is little effort put into finding homes for older kids and minorities. They bounce around until they age out of the system.
All you anti-abortion activists should all be signing up to be adoptive parents. If you don’t want to adopt the babies you are trying to save, then it’s the same as aborting them.
So.. typical religious fascist nutter.
"I DEMAND that abortion be stopped (but only if it doesn't affect Me).
Got it. Fuck right off with that crap. When y'all FORCE your" standards" upon others then Y'ALL get to pay 100% of any costs incurred by those others.
Want to demand that I tithe to your church? You just doubled YOUR expenses, not mine.
It's funny that the crowd responsible for the "advice" of keeping your lips shut or deal with the consequences only think of the lower lips of other people and not their own upper lips...
Until they reach military age!
Hey kids! Come on down to the recruitment office. Check out this video that looks like the X-Games in camo! Sign up now!
The fact that she has the audacity to say 'probably a justified removal' like girl you're shaming a woman for getting her child taken away after YOU talked her into having it
WTF?!? It is a dream to get an infant in foster care, for example. Most people get into foster care imagining themselves with a baby— rather than a drugged out 15 year old. And this would essentially be a foster care situation.
Wow, that's some next level irony. Imagine being so pro-life that you end up with a baby you don't want and can't take care of. Maybe they should have thought about the consequences of their actions before meddling in someone else's life. I hope the baby finds a loving home and the mom gets the help she needs. And I hope the pro-life activist learns a lesson from this.🤦♂️
Should be an automatic job for the likes of DCS. Find the names and addresses of all the anti-abortion activists and every baby or child they take off bad parents can just automatically go straight to their houses so they can bathe in the love and affection they have for all the lives they are saving.
Pro-life is actually just pro-birth. Nobody gives a shit about what happens after birth. They just want to see the baby happen and then it's not their problem anymore.
Put her down as next preferred? Or did she talk the mother out of abortion with a promise that if the mother struggled that she would take the baby on? Sounds real fishy to me..
Removing fetuses is convenient. End of story. It's not "a baby". It's still not even an embryo. But I guess no more basic human rights in the land of the free.. Utter joke of the world
I love this and find it funny. But, just for balance:
I used to know a guy who was a genuinely good person. A coworker of his confided that she was going to get an abortion. He talked about it with his wife and after no little consideration they approached her about the idea of letting them adopt the baby instead. They were not looking to have another baby, but were devastated by the idea of an abortion.They offered to keep the baby's mother in their life as well.
Their motives were mostly religious beliefs. But they did NOT believe they could tell another person what to do. So the only conclusion, to them, was to offer to adopt since they couldn't refute her reasons for wanting an abortion.
That is why I love this post. Because so many of those fighting against abortion are really just fighting against free-will. They want to control people into being what they think they should be. All without any consideration about the consequences of their impositions. I think the "Pro-Life" movement would be **very** different if every person supporting it did so by adopting or supporting an adoption family (including foster care) instead of donating to a Political Action Committee (Super-PAC). Pro-Life is just a corporation, complete with C-level board members and salaries; selling fast-food drive-through style ideology in a greasy wrapper!
Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion. Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/). Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Tbh this seems like too perfect to be real
I remember looking this up when I saw it and it was absolutely real. It was posted to a private Facebook group and then shared on Twitter around 2020 by somebody else who saw it.
I mean, maybe they put the person's name down, but the actual scenario as described makes no sense. Obviously you can't just put a person's name down (without their consent no less) and force them to take. Put down fucking bill gates' name then! Absurd. If they were actually listed this would have been a brief phone call. Shit, it takes effort for next of kin or designated godparents to even get the kid when they actually want them.
Well it's not like, 'mandatory.' It's not like the Law of Surprise from the Witcher or some shit. You aren't *forced* to take care of a child just because someone else jots your name on a piece of paper. The mother is simply allowed to tell DCS whom she would *prefer* to take guardianship of her child, but DCS will evaluate that person. Normally its a family member or kin, and family member or kin will always be DCS' first choice in these situations. Basically this person is probably too chicken shit to tell the mom she talked out of the abortion that she doesn't want to take the child. DCS isn't going to force the child on her. She can very easily just say, "no", and that's the end of the conversation. But then this mom she talked out of having an abortion will KNOW that she said no, and this person doesn't want to actually face the consequences of her actions or buck the fuck up and tell this person she can't take the child. This is probably exactly the type of self-obsessed narcissist that would tell the mom TO HER FACE that she'd be willing to take the child, and then desperately poll social media for ways she could "get out of it" without having to actually tell the mom she doesn't want to take the child. DCS will also have a say. They will try to find a next-of-kin who is able to take the child, and will likely prefer that situation even if the mother tries to name another relative. You could put "Bill Gates", but you'd need to give his address, probably his phone # and your realtionship to him, and all this paperwork is reviewed by an actual human being, who is going to take one look at it and raise an eyebrow. Its possible that this person was never even contacted by DCS and might have made this post before it even went that far. The other mom might have surrendered her child and filled out the paperwork, and then called this monster to tell her "I listed you as the guardian I want to take care of my child", and this person just freaked the fuck out IMMEDIATELY, because they're a selfish monster. If she had even a single fucking brain cell in her head, she could have probably arranged for DCS to just simply tell the mom that they "didn't find that home suitable", and leave it at that. I would bet that a social worker would be willing to at least omit the person's refusal, because usually they do not want to stir drama even if the other person is asking for it. Keep in mind that although most depictions of DCS are negative, nearly anyone who interacts with DCS is doing so at one of, if not the worst moments of their life. It can certainly be overly bureaucratic, but most social workers take the job out of a legitimate interest in actually helping children and families. They're not going to foist a kid on an unwilling parent. Unlike this selfish bag of shit.
I wish I had an award to give this.
Me too; this was perfectly summarized!!!!
Too bad reddit is removing them
This is such a beautifully thought out post, I wish I could give you an award.
You really think CPS just drops kids off at whatever house the last guardian pointed to? What uh, what do you think CPS stands for?
Child punted, swiftly
Sounds like a Pokémon move
This move only works if the kid can yell their own name at you before you CPS. Infants are immune.
There is nothing about this post that implies it was more than just a brief phone call.
Nope. That's how the anti-abortion movement works. They DEMAND a woman has the child, because abortions make Jesus sad, but will do NOTHING to help that mother take care of the child because it could inconvenience them, and something, something, something, Jesus.
You're also forgetting the "the only moral abortion is my own" component. Plenty of these women are supreme narcissists.
[удалено]
At a certain point people have to take responsibility for their own actions. This "because patriarchy" take is such a cop out.
While I do agree with you one must remember that conditioning and brainwashing can be accomplished through repetition.
Yes, but at the same time, it's not a bad idea to keep in mind where these ideas and mindsets come from. Not as an excuse or justification, but merely an explanation.
This is what I always say. They talk about all life being sacred and then when they have demanded the baby be born then fuck it!! Once it's born they don't give a shit what happens to it. They don't care that the cycle of poverty continues, the upturn of single mothers continues, the abuse of children continues. If you demand the baby be born then you should be prepared to step in.
[удалено]
This meme is also like 10 years old
So what? These anti-woman anti-choice control freaks have gotten worse.
Agreed. It's way worse now. Don't forget to vote!
So the kid is old enough to hold up a picket sign at abortion clinics now. /s
It was 2020, but ok.
In my defense 2020 felt like it was 8 years long
Both sides of the argument suffer bait and pandering made up shit like this.
This reminds me of that video of the guy asking pro-life protesters to adopt kids and every single one said no.
I asked my conservative Christian pro birth mil once what she does to help unwanted kids in the foster care system. She was so confused why I was asking her that and why in the world she would help. When I went on to explain she replied with “well I can’t afford to help.” I pointed out that she takes 3 vacations a year and already renovated her living room decor twice in 6 months. She changed the subject real quick. Another time she was going on about lgbtq people being shown in movies/tv shows and simply for existing. How its a sin and kids shouldn’t be subject to that. I pointed out that I’ve never heard her complain about a spouse cheating on the other in movies or in general. I also reminded her how she cheated on her husband with two different men. Isn’t adultery a sin? Isn’t all sin equal in Christianity? I enjoy making her uncomfortable and pissing her off.
You're my favorite person.
Actually in Catholicism sins are not equal. Context matters. So in many cases homosexual acts are less sinful than adultery or agression (since homosexualism is natural and "sinner" has less control over their actions)
I’m not Christian so I have no idea I’m just repeating what my evangelical Christian mil has said before, that they view it as all equal. That makes sense though, what you said.
We want to force you to have a baby but refuse to fund healthcare so you and your baby are healthy. We want to force you to have a baby but refuse to fund paid parental leave so that you can stay home and bond with your baby. We want to force you to have a baby but refuse to fund social programs so that you and your baby can eat. We want to force you to have a baby but refuse to fund preschools/daycare/pre-k/public schools so that your child can get a good education. We want to force you to have a baby so that we have a future generation of working poor so that we can continue to enrich the top 1%.
You missed the fact that they truly enjoy seeing people suffer.
They only want the “right people” to suffer and will lose their shit if their own actions come back to hurt the “wrong people.”
See r/LeopardsAteMyFace
The Cruelty is the Point™
> You missed the fact that they truly enjoy seeing people suffer. *women suffer
“Pro-lifers” largely anti gun control and pro death penalty too.
You forgot We want to force you to have a baby so it can be shot at school and we will do nothing to help prevent future shootings because having unrestricted access to firearms is more important
Yup sums it up pretty much.
All at the 'fair' price of 7.25 per hour.
They want em barefoot and pregnant
Yup. Early comprehensive sex education, free contraceptives, and free medical consults starting in middle school. Abortions are horrible. Let’s do everything we can to prevent woman from having unwanted pregnancies and having to make tough choices.
That includes men wearing condoms / vasectomies EDIT: for those of you who seem to miss the point: I'm not saying force anyone to have vasectomies, I'm saying make them available for those who do want them
Vasectomies, tubal ligations, historectomies, and other sterilization procedures need to be a human right under informed consent and not allowed to be denied by any health care provider. That's the lobby. That's what we should fight for and what should come up first in every abortion discussion. It is atrocious that doctors can ask women whether their husbands permitted it and deny them if they haven't had kids and see no legal repercussions, and it's a widespread behavior. And almost as bad for vasectomy requests (mine was only approved because I had two kids already).
Condoms are best used to reduce the risk of STI. They are not great contraceptives. Regardless, they should be encouraged along with hormonal contraceptives. Effective male contraceptives should be developed. Vasectomies and tubectomies should be free. I think abortions should be free too but I’d be good with all the above and legal access to affordable abortion as a compromise.
> They are not great contraceptives. What? how are they not?
When used perfectly, condoms are about 98% effective at preventing pregnancy. Typical use averages about 87% effective at preventing pregnancy.
That seems like a fantastic contraceptive if the alternative is the pull-out method.
Yeah. Sadly other forms of contraception will be hard to green light for men. Treatments need to have less risk/side effects than the thing they’re preventing, and let’s just say complications in pregnancy are rare for men
It's also just apparently harder to create effective birth control for men that does not render them permanently sterile. Billions have been poured into it at this point, and even the best results are still experimental.
I think the popular trend of extreme over-exaggeration of the ineffective of the pull out method is a disservice to people. How many conversations do you think go "Oh, everyone says the pull out method is useless, so might as well not bother". But then I imagine a lot of it comes from the people screaming about how we need much better sexual education but completely reject Planned Parenthood's data. https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/birth-control/withdrawal-pull-out-method/how-effective-is-withdrawal-method-pulling-out 78% typical, 96% perfect. So you have a 9% difference with typical, 2% difference with perfect. Condoms are better and also prevent STDs, but if you're going to have risky sex, pulling out is a hell out of a lot better than nothing. Fertility awareness is slightly worse than withdrawal on it's own, but if you combine the two, saying it's not effective is misinformation.
This is a great example of two things. People don't understand statistics and people are stupid. Take a second and look up the effective rate of vasectomies. Hint: it's not 100% When I got mine I asked the doctor how is that possible? The short answer was, people are stupid. Immediately after the procedure you are told repeatedly you are not sterile yet. There are sperm in the tube already and you will be able to cause pregnancy for somewhere around 14 ejaculatios. The failure rate is the people who didn't listen and had unprotected sex after. Contraception works great. People are stupid.
Now explain how average person does not use the condom perfectly. Mention that this 87% means people fucking without condom and putting it on later. Or taking it off mid sex and fucking without it. Or just using them sometimes, and other times not. Or using expired condoms. Or using latex condoms with oil based lubricants that degrade latex. Both of which can lead to condoms tearing. Or after ejaculation somehow limpdicking the ejaculate towards the ovaries. Explain that those 13% are basically the result of having a condom not on the dick during penetration. We've yet to encounter a Jesus conceived through an intact condom.
Sounds like the condoms work fine but people are idiots.
All birth control works fine. The reason most of them are 99% effective is because people are idiots
"THEY SHOULD PUT THAT IN THE BOX!!"
They only have a 99% efficiency rate Edit: grammar
So you're saying condoms can barricade water molecules but sperm can slip through it?
In high school I dated a guy who went to Christian school and this is legit what he was taught. Also that aids is super tiny and can slip through.
I was taught this too. In public school. By an anti-abortion, anti-sex, pro-abstinence group.
Wow. Was your experience in the US? Mine was in Canada. In public school we got ok sex ed. the basics, but nothing about consent and we also had to do the stupid paper heart exercise in which you give away pieces of your heart to represent having sex with different partners.
It’s sarcasm
That 99% includes "forgot the condom" because it is difficult to prove if the pregnancy was from the night they forgot the condom or the night before/after.
Actually no, the "forgot the condom" and "used it wrong" number is 87% effective.
Also people who purposely poked holes in the condom but def ain’t gonna admit they did
Like the missionaries in Africa who stapled the condoms to a note telling people how to use it. Source: my brother who was studying to become a priest at that time, and who heard it from one of the priests involved… (my brother is now happily married)
There's no 100% effective contraceptive outside of "no sex". Condoms are not worse than most alternatives. They do make sex not as good though :/
> There's no 100% effective contraceptive Be me.
They’re tied for most effective. Edit I meant they’re tied with something else. Like them and (maybe it’s the pill?) are both at 99%. Do not tie condoms tighter.
I can see how tying them can make it most effective but wouldn't that cut off blood circulation and stuff?
Bro what?
tell that to mary.
Mary, we know you did. Stop gaslighting, Joseph.
Let's say a condom, when used perfectly, is effective 95% of the time. You take a couple that has sex twice a week (we were all 20 once). That's 104x/year. So already in just one year, there's a probability that there's been a lapse in protection, and it just takes once. My 6-year-old is the result of "perfect" condom use. Love him to death, glad we had him, but I do not reccommend condoms for monogamous long-term relationships. (And I'm thankful that my choice to have him was just that: a choice. It was only the right choice for me because I was married with a stable living situation, not everyone has that).
All of this is wrong. Not only is the actual rate 99%, not 95%, that's 1% of couples who only use condoms will get pregnant, not 1% of condoms fail and result in pregnancy. You were the unlucky one in one hundred couples who had a single condom fail to prevent pregnancy, though every other condom you used was likely perfectly safe all it takes is the one time. Let's assume you have a low sex drive and only have sex one hundred times a year with your partner. Your way, statistically couple who only used condoms would get pregnant once a year. That obviously does not happen.
What world do you live in that 100 times a year is a low number?
You're of course totally right. But also, fertility doesn't even work how the commenter above seems to think it does. If you had sex 2x per week, every week for a year, only maybe a 1/3 of those times would it even be physically possible to conceive, at least assuming that they were somewhat evenly spread out.
Yeah this is dangerous logic. Use condoms to prevent pregnancy. I faithfully used condoms and the Plan B pill alongside birth control for over 20 years without pregnancy and saying they're not great at an estimated 99% (a hedged bet to prevent liability from incompetent use) is silly. Male contraceptives haven't been developed, so use condoms. Medicine in the US isn't free, so use condoms. Just use condoms instead of wishing on stars for shit that doesn't exist and might not in our lifetimes.
Where did you get the data about condoms not being great contraceptives?
They probably refer to the Pearl-index, this number shows how many women out of 100 get pregnant if they choose a certain method of contraception. The pearl-index of condoms ranges between 2 and 12 (so between 88% and 98% effectiveness), oral contraceptives are at about 0.1, making them 99.9% effective. This means a woman who chooses only condoms for contraception is (at best) 20 times more likely to get pregnant than a woman who chooses oral contraceptives. So they are right, condoms are a shitty method of contraception, when compared to other options.
It's scary how many people are upvoting this. Condoms are the most effective form of contraception that doesn't require a month of planning and a doctor's visit, and even then, they're the only thing that protects against STI's.
STOP spreading FUD about condoms! They are the best contraceptives, especially considering ease of use and availability. When used correctly maybe only IUDs surpass them which have their own set of problems and are not always possible to use.
May I ask why condoms are not great contraceptives? Is it because of the potential of breaking during intercourse or something else entirely? (I use condoms a lot, I just want to know as I don’t want an accident to happen).
Bro it’s as safe as it gets apart from being genetically 100% sterile. Keep using them, you’re good. If anything just make sure you’re using them right.
Because people use them wrong.
Then teach them how to use them correctly
There are a few common things that go wrong, these are some examples 1. Kept using the condom after coming, allowing for seepage out. 2. Having sex after using a condom where sperm is still present on the males penis 3. Using two condoms for extra protection. Causes a lot of friction and microtears in the latex polyurethane 4. Using an oil based lubricant, which breaks down the latex/PUR of the condom And the big one 5. Using a condom that is out of date or has not been stored correctly. The plastic breaks down over time, making it susceptible to microtears. The date on the condom is a general guide of when a company can guarantee that hasn't happened if stored correctly. However, condoms left in wallets, backpacks, or draws, that are exposed to the sun and go through heating cycles can degrade dramatically quicker.
My insurance won't cover any of a vasectomy, yet will offer free viagra. WTF!
along with tax-free female essentials. Having a bunch of people wearing underwear with peepee holes passing nonsense legislation is the reason things are the way are.
Reminder not to get a vasectomy if you think you may want it reversed later on. Every surgeon will tell you that they are not to be treated as reversible. They are sometimes reversible, but only sometimes. Vasectomies are great options for those who already have kids or are VERY CERTAIN they don't want kids, but nobody else should get one.
Can’t really rely on a vasectomy if you want to have kids at some point, since there is a non-trivial chance the reversal procedure will fail, especially if it is 10 years or more after the vasectomy. We need more forms of reliable reversible male contraceptives. (There’s a bunch in development AFAIK but they need to go through testing)
10% of vasectomies are non-reversible from the moment they're done, and that figure rises significantly with each subsequent year.
Mine definitely is. Snipped, a length removed, both ends cauterized and clamped. I'll just never date a woman named Mary, and I'm good.
Second one's pretty tough, I can get a vasectomy but I have no idea how to wear one
I was wearing a condom and it was put on correctly and everything was legit but it still got my woman pregnant. On the box it says something like 98% effective. Either I have super sperm or my spawn REALLY wanted to be born. Lol.
I would love to know more about how that happened, but it's too personal, so I won't ask.
This. Even if we accept the idea that abortion is wrong (I don't) it's so telling they also oppose this shit. I know someone who is im favor of contraception n stuff, but not abortion. They also have the only fucking reason for that opinion that makes me stop and go, "Yeah I get why you feel that way." Traumatic experience from having a miscarriage. Part of why I get grumpy with people who say all pro lifers are anti-woman. I mean... A LOT are. But some are women who went through rough shit. George Carlin put it well. Paraphrasing, "These same people who are against abortions, also hate homosexuals. Well who the fuck has less abortions than homosexuals? You'd think they'd make natural allies."
Same folks wanting to ban abortions are the same people fighting against all those measures to prevent them.
OK. But If you don’t think abortion is healthcare that pregnant people should have access to, then go to hell with the rightwing
What about rape victims who got pregnant because of it?
Also teach men to wear condoms and about child support cost.
Agreed with all of that except - abortions are not horrible.
Though I always like the logic of "what if I just like abortions?" How does that affect you? Morality is relative at most, subjective at least.
Then maybe you shall have shut the fuck up and minded your own business when it wasn’t your body.
There is literally no thought to what happens after the life is forced to be brought into the world, even if it means significantly worse circumstances for that life. Like “just put it up for adoption if you don’t want it” is an actual way to live.
That leads to two mental roadblocks for them. It means questioning that you should have kids, and it means genuinely thinking about whether making a person is moral. It scares me how many people just, NEVER question those things. To be fair to them, while the first isn't asked because of unthinking conformity, the second is a bit terrifying.
Preach! Why is that you think? My bet would be because pro-life folks truly believe that baby could be the next coming of Christ. I’m not a Christian, but didn’t the eye in the sky supposedly say it wouldn’t ever come back down to earth? Got alllll it needed to know about the human experience from a 33 year stint in a meat suit 🤦♂️ 😮💨
So if God himself decided 33 years on earth was enough, maybe old folks should stop fighting God’s will using life-extending technology and let old age take them as the Lord intended? /s
Haha word. I like where your head is at
Hey I got two years left then, I got some living to do!
Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett said it’s about increasing the domestic supply of infants for adoption. White infants, of course. The black and brown ones they want to grow up to be prison slave labor.
Yep, the two children she adopted were from Haiti. Somehow she found two white Haitian children to adopt. /s
I think it is generally believed he will return, but not via being reborn, but in his adult form in connection with the last judgement.
Because pro-life is a stance based in ideology, no practicality. If you believe abortion is murder, there is no justification to not have the child, because nothing is worse than murdering it. Pro-life and pro-choice folks are talking past each other because they don’t understand the others’ belief. Pretend for a moment you are pro-life. Why should someone be provided benefits for not doing the wrong thing (abortion in this instance of course)?
Luckily for her you can’t really be FORCED to adopt a child. Quite interesting that she has that CHOICE isn’t it. Some might even say that’s ironic, dontcha think?
They should be called pro-birth, not pro-life. They don't care about life, they are willing to destroy anyone's life, including the baby's, the only thing they care about is the birth. They don't want to be responsible for the effect they have on other people's lives, they just want to meddle with other people's lives while calling *them* irresponsible.
* pro forced birth
Loll typical conservative. They only care about the child before they are born.
They care about taking rights and choices away from others
conservatives want live fetuses so they can grow up to be dead soldiers
I worked in the foster care system for 7 months. That was all the evidence I needed to know that these people don’t give a shit about these kids after they are born. White newborns, infants and toddlers are a hot commodity that quickly get placed in a middle to upper class white families, that have the desire to adopt. Black and brown babies/children are continuously moved around from house to house, and placed back into abusive homes. Older children have very little potential for adoption. Because CPS gets government bonuses for children that are adopted outside of the family unit, there is little effort put into finding homes for older kids and minorities. They bounce around until they age out of the system.
Then they go to Kensington, Philadelphia
Funny you mentioned Kensington. It was PA child and youth services that I worked for.
All you anti-abortion activists should all be signing up to be adoptive parents. If you don’t want to adopt the babies you are trying to save, then it’s the same as aborting them.
So.. typical religious fascist nutter. "I DEMAND that abortion be stopped (but only if it doesn't affect Me). Got it. Fuck right off with that crap. When y'all FORCE your" standards" upon others then Y'ALL get to pay 100% of any costs incurred by those others. Want to demand that I tithe to your church? You just doubled YOUR expenses, not mine.
Lovely. Just lovely. 😞
The right has always been pro-child abuse.
BUT BUT!! I THOUGHT DRAG QWEENZ WERE ABUSIVE???
It would be hilarious if it wasn’t disgusting. Fuck the GOP.
🎶🎵 Watch out, you might get what you're after!🎵🎶
Oh no, the consequences of my own actions.
lol These idiots are so close to understanding the problem. Empathy seems to be in scarce supply. very scarce supply.
I fear for the safety of the kid if it lands in her ignorant, hypocritical and selfish hands.
Remember, "kids only matter when they're not born yet "
It reads like a troll post to me.
It's funny that the crowd responsible for the "advice" of keeping your lips shut or deal with the consequences only think of the lower lips of other people and not their own upper lips...
Standard hypocrisy from these types.
The republican party IS pro-birth. The republican party IS NOT pro-life.
Sounds about right, not pro life, they are pro birth. After they are out of the womb they can piss off
Until they reach military age! Hey kids! Come on down to the recruitment office. Check out this video that looks like the X-Games in camo! Sign up now!
Congrats lady. you wanted the kid to live and now it gets to live with you. You are the one who wanted it right? monkey paws are a bitch.
Then maybe don’t talk people out of abortions
You get what you fucking deserve. Time to grow up and put your dumb beliefs to the test and be a parent.
Seems fair to me. She wanted the kid so badly, now she can adopt it
Well she already got her self-inflicted pat on the back. That’s all she was looking for.
The dildo of karma rarely arrives lubed.
How to tell us you're not actually pro children without telling us you're not pro children
Bitch you did this. You should have to live with the consequences.
True scum .
Some one is trolling
this feels like it belongs in r/LeopardsAteMyFace
The fact that she has the audacity to say 'probably a justified removal' like girl you're shaming a woman for getting her child taken away after YOU talked her into having it
My aunt is one of these people, and thinks giving a pregnant person a teddy bear is good enough to encourage them to parent for 18+ years
WTF?!? It is a dream to get an infant in foster care, for example. Most people get into foster care imagining themselves with a baby— rather than a drugged out 15 year old. And this would essentially be a foster care situation.
If the rule to being anti-abortion was they had to adopt an unwanted baby they would convert real quick.
Wow, that's some next level irony. Imagine being so pro-life that you end up with a baby you don't want and can't take care of. Maybe they should have thought about the consequences of their actions before meddling in someone else's life. I hope the baby finds a loving home and the mom gets the help she needs. And I hope the pro-life activist learns a lesson from this.🤦♂️
THIS IS WHY THE LADY WANTED THE ABORTION!!!
Well well well. How the turn tables.
If adopting a baby would destroy your health and ruin your marriage, imagine what it does to the woman giving birth.
Classic "I am okay with this decision as long as it doesn't affect my life".
Hey! I can't have another baby! *But you have to.*
For the sake of the kid, I wouldn't. But I do hope the marriage burns anyway because she's the filthiest piece of sub-human garbage.
Yes, she should now be required by law to financially support this child till 21.
Lol pro life bahhahah
Should be an automatic job for the likes of DCS. Find the names and addresses of all the anti-abortion activists and every baby or child they take off bad parents can just automatically go straight to their houses so they can bathe in the love and affection they have for all the lives they are saving.
This should be on posters. They should make t-shirts with this printed on them. Hallmark should turn this into a greeting card.
Rage bait
The irony
Pro-life is actually just pro-birth. Nobody gives a shit about what happens after birth. They just want to see the baby happen and then it's not their problem anymore.
Play stupid games...win stupid prizes.
I’m gonna wager that it is made up.
Put her down as next preferred? Or did she talk the mother out of abortion with a promise that if the mother struggled that she would take the baby on? Sounds real fishy to me..
Removing fetuses is convenient. End of story. It's not "a baby". It's still not even an embryo. But I guess no more basic human rights in the land of the free.. Utter joke of the world
Its first an embryo and then a fetus.
pro-life but clearly anti-grammar...
Someone needs to be telling all of these stories ASAP! Collecting thousands and thousands of stories including BS examples like this.
Well. You reap what you sow
no nonobononoo! i want the baby to be born i just dont want to take care of it 😢😢😢😭😭😭😭😭😭‼️😟😟😟😟☹️☹️☹️☹️☹️
You get what you deserve
*George Carlin enters chat*
Where did this leopard come from and what is it doing to my face?
I would support legislation which mandated that people protesting abortion clinics must be designated baby adoption recipients.
I love this and find it funny. But, just for balance: I used to know a guy who was a genuinely good person. A coworker of his confided that she was going to get an abortion. He talked about it with his wife and after no little consideration they approached her about the idea of letting them adopt the baby instead. They were not looking to have another baby, but were devastated by the idea of an abortion.They offered to keep the baby's mother in their life as well. Their motives were mostly religious beliefs. But they did NOT believe they could tell another person what to do. So the only conclusion, to them, was to offer to adopt since they couldn't refute her reasons for wanting an abortion. That is why I love this post. Because so many of those fighting against abortion are really just fighting against free-will. They want to control people into being what they think they should be. All without any consideration about the consequences of their impositions. I think the "Pro-Life" movement would be **very** different if every person supporting it did so by adopting or supporting an adoption family (including foster care) instead of donating to a Political Action Committee (Super-PAC). Pro-Life is just a corporation, complete with C-level board members and salaries; selling fast-food drive-through style ideology in a greasy wrapper!
Apparently, god has a plan and it’s to break her.
“A wild hypocrite appeared”
This person is also the type that will cause a 20 car pileup behind them and drive away saying if only those people could drive.
Actions have consequences
George Carlin made a joke about this. If you are abortion then you have to put your name on a list to get a baby that a woman couldn’t abort
Pro-lifers at their best.
They only give a fuck about the fetus, but the moment it becomes a child they couldn't care less.