Comments about ‘Ex-teen mom heads filibuster versus abortion limit’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, June 26 2013 12:00 a.m. MDT

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Gallatin, MO

"I'm rising on the floor today to humbly give voice to thousands of Texans who are being ignored. These voices have been silenced by a governor who made blind partisanship and personal political ambition the priority of our state.” Does she really hear what she is saying? How can one be so humble as to snuff out the life of any unborn child. Can they speak for themselves. Did she want to abort her own child? Why would anyone do that? Past feeling I guess, prideful, selfish, and irresponsible I would not say humble, really?

Happy Valley Heretic
Orem, UT

"prideful, selfish, and irresponsible" perfectly describe the texas legislature and their callus disregard for those living.
and how cowardice to stop her with a trumped up technicality in order to bully her.

...in other news Texas far and away ahead for state sanctioned murder in their penal system.

Danish American
Payson, UT

Yes, she should be so proud to be leading the charge to kill kids. As for the death penalty Mr. Heretic, those people had a choice. Unborn children don't. You are one of the ones who continually advocate for someone's so called rights but the most defenseless you are all right with killing. It's not being a heretic, it's being a hypocrite.

American Fork, UT

Texas is just one of the places that tries so hard to disempower women.

Cool Cat Cosmo
Payson, UT

Amen, Danish.

What about the rights of the unborn?

DN Subscriber 2

Ask yourselves- would the news reporting be just as fawning and positive had this been a conservative activist thwarting passage of a bill that facilitated abortion?

Media bias is real.

Bountiful, UT

This lady is wrong. As a nation we have little right to criticize Nazi Germany. What we are doing now with abortion and what we did with slavery is just as bad.

Midwest Mom
Soldiers Grove, WI

Excuse me. "Killing kids?" Abortion rights run the gamut of "morning after pill" to saving the life of the mother, with all sorts of ugly issues in between. The point is that it is a woman's body and her right to choose life for herself, as well as her children. "Choosing life" implies that there is an option. What do these anti-abortion supporters have to say to the man whose wife was not allowed to be induced in Ireland, because her baby was dead inside her? That mother died from sepsis because of Ireland's strict abortion laws. My own daughter was suspected of having an hydatiform pregnancy. All turned out well, but if it had been as her doctors had feared, then without access to legal and safe termination of her pregnancy, her non-child tissue mass could have turned malignant and ended her life. Before you speak against the right to a medical procedure, make sure you have all the facts and that your vote to save doesn't end up being a vote that kills other innocent life.

Salt Lake City, UT

The nation with the lowest abortion rates in the world is not one where it's illegal but rather it's Belgium which chooses to focus on preventing unplanned pregnancies through comprehensive sex education and universal access to birth control as part of gov't healthcare. So really, no President has taken as strong a stand to reduce abortions as President Obama and his healthcare bill. Funny how things work...

Hyrum, UT

@ Midwest Mom:

First of all, regarding the vast majority of abortions, the mothers life is seldom ever in danger. In fact, more would-be moms probably die from botched abortion attempts than from the type of health examples you mentioned. Yes, you can find unusual and obscure exceptions from other countries to try to make your case (as you did), but doing so doesn't carry much pragmatic argumentative weight.

The would-be mom is very seldom ever faced with having to choose life or not for herself, but rather is always faced with choosing life or death for her baby. Realistically, it almost always comes down between choosing the convenience of her lifestyle versus the chance of life for her baby. Common sense should make that a no-brainer. Choosing abortion is usually the ultimate selfishness.

Secondly, almost all abortion bills in the USA make exception for the small percentage of times when a woman's health is actually at risk. Therefore your argument with that is moot. Right to Life advocates don't want any woman to die. None. They simply want the inalienable right of all babies to live. That isn't unreasonable.

Midwest Mom
Soldiers Grove, WI

Pardon me, Tators, but where do you get your "vast majority" of information about the reasons for abortions?

You seem so assured that right-to-life legislation would never "want" any woman to die, but you don't explain specific protections against that outcome. I have given a specific example of a woman whose life was taken because of strict abortion laws. Can you give me a single example of a woman who was granted an abortion to preserve her health or life, when strict law otherwise prevented? Many new anti-abortion rights laws seek to also limit certain forms of reliable birth control. For some women, becoming pregnant can be a health hazard. Would you require them to become sterilized, instead? How far do you want to scrutinize and supervise the intimate lives of married couples?

And what about rape victims? Would your "inalienable right of all babies" extend to preventing morning after pill access for victims of rape, especially young girls? Do you propose funding for medical care for all pregnancies resulting from rape or must these victims of crime also be required to pay for their health care to promote your easy conscience?

springville, UT

@ Midwest Mom. Do you realize what you said? The mother has the right to choose life or death for her children?!? Absolutely not. Parents cannot choose to kill their born children, and it is the same for the unborn children. I absolutely believe women should be empowered, and it disgusts me that abortion has been made out to be a women's rights issue. This isn't about women's rights---it's about killing unborn children. Women should have every right entitled to them ... but it stops at the life of another human being.

Austin, TX

As a Texan, and a Member of the LDS Church altho I dont attend currently, I can only say I am appaled at the hate coming out of the Texas Legislature and some of the comments here. Personally I am against abortion, but I am pro-choice, a woman's decision to have one should be between her, her doctor, and whatever God she prays to and hopefull the father. Roe v. Wade was not about abortion, altho a wish for an abortion is what percipitated it. It is about a woman's right to control her own body by her own decision. The Texas bill would have set women back 150 years much like the repeal of Roe v. Wade would. The church has never been about forcing it's teaching and beliefs on someone that chooses not to hear them, why should this be any different. some of you need to get a clue

2 bits
Cottonwood Heights, UT

She's my HERO... if there's anything we need in the world, it's unlimited Abortion rights in Texas!

Who said ANYTHING about repealing Roe V Wade?
This is the TEXAS legislature... not the United States Supreme Court.
Only the Supreme Court could repeal Roe V Wade!

Exactly what "limits" were they proposing in Texas anyway? Does ANYBODY know? Does it matter that you don't even know? Is ANY limit on Abortion unacceptable to you people? Seems like the article should at least MENTION what limits she was fighting.

Park City, Ut

1st of all, and once and for all, a fetus is not an "unborn child" anymore than male seed and a woman's egg separately are half a human being, otherwise every man and woman is guilty of committing genocide monthly, weekly, daily, especially the males. You are certainly entitled to your opinions, but not your own set of scientific facts, ok? And rather than get into this debate I offer this observation, why not allow Women and Women only decide this issue? After all it is their bodies we are talking about, that and a private doctors visit that is no one else's business but the Woman's. So how about? Most lawmakers in most states are male, yet they are the ones's making these decisions on behalf of Women. I call shenanigans. That or a Majority of Women should be able to make laws regarding the health of Men... perhaps we outlaw Viagra, 2 week waiting period for vasectomies? Best idea, keep the government out of a private doctors visit; focus on your family, mind your own business!

Brave Sir Robin
San Diego, CA

Every pro-abortionist in the world today is here because of his/her mother choosing life.

The irony of this never ceases to amaze me.

Kate Hutch
Kenmore, WA

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. A stitch in time saves nine. A prevented pregnancy won't be aborted. How do we prevent unplanned pregnancy? Through an enlightened education program where children are taught science. REAL science about their bodies and other tangible topics. If you are against abortion, surely you should be FOR comprehensive sex education.

Park City, Ut

@ Brave Sir Robin - No one is "pro-abortion" otherwise those who are for corporal punishment are "pro-death" I think most people in this country, at least according to the latest polling on the issue, are pro-reason, pro-Woman's right to make tough decisions for what personal reason she might need/choose.

Virginia Beach, VA

I'am always amazed how passionate pro-abortionist are in support of 40 million plus babies murdered the past 40 years. Pure selfishness before, during the pregnancy, and the choice they made.

Brave Sir Robin
San Diego, CA


So are you in favor of legalized abortion or against it? If you're in favor, then you're pro-abortion. Call it whatever soft, fluffy name you want, but at the end of the day you're pro-abortion.

And if abortion is such a good thing, then why are you ashamed of being called pro-abortion?

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments