are called[by whom?] "pro-life"

By many people that are pro-abortion. The following way of thinking seems to be norm nowadays: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/You%27re_either_with_us,_or_...

I think the term "pro-life" is being abused to put labels on people who are just against the points I mentioned. These people are not necessarily "anti-abortion".

Who exactly is pro-abortion? Do you think there are women out there getting their kicks from getting pregnant just to have an abortion because it's such a fun time?

It's an imperfect choice in an imperfect world, where a lot can happen. I wouldn't say anyone is "pro-abortion", but a lot of people are pro-choice, knowing that a blanket ban puts people at risk.

> I think the term "pro-life" is being abused to put labels on people who are just against the points I mentioned. These people are not necessarily "anti-abortion".

So what you're saying is someone who thinks it's okay to get a first trimester abortion for any reason is pro-life? That seems absurd.

Sorry I meant "pro-choice" and I agree with what you say. I never wanted to say that abortion is a good thing or there are people that want this.

What I wanted to say is that there are not just 2 sides:

pro-choice: agreeing with any form of abortion (note: I am not saying people want it)

pro-life: against any form of abortion

As I keep getting downvoted. Can you explain, as English is not my native language, why being pro-something also implies that the people undergoing that something are liking it?

If someone is pro-war, does that imply that the people that are part of the war are liking it?

Terminology is extremely important, the words we use have meaning.

"Pro-abortion" implies (especially when compared to "pro-life") that abortion is to be promoted above other options or abortion is something good or something to strive for. The correct term is "pro-choice" because its not about promoting abortion, its about promoting an individual's choice of how to handle a pregnancy and making every option safely and readily available to them.

"Pro-choice" and "pro-abortion" are not synonyms of each other and calling the pro-choice movement "pro-abortion" is not correct.

Thank you for the explanation.

Mothers risk their lives to give birth. If at any point in time a mother chooses to no longer offer her body as a temple for human growth, that is her decision, period. Forcing women to have children and give birth is sickening.

Here is something I would like to see some statistics into: the demographic of women who wish to have abortions during their third trimester or after for non related health reasons. I am not sure this is the case, but I would be willing to bet its not women in their 30s/white suburban housewives planning a family, and this is almost entirely skewed towards a poverty stricken demographic who usually is unable to afford a pregnancy test, and furthemore, live in neighborhoods/areas where there is a constant onslaught of domestic violent and sexual abuse, leaving women vulnerable, much less with $60 to walk to rite aid to grab a pregnancy test and plan B pill.

Alot of poor women do not know they are pregnant until multiple months in, even in the United States. This may sound bizarre and only possible out of sheer neglect, but I have friends who work for and at Planned Parenthood.

Excessive stress, physical abuse, weight gain or loss due to poor diet (welfare food/doritoes or not having access to food at all), mostly extreme stress (rape/abuse) can lead to missing periods.

If I lose 5 ibs in a month I miss my period. It could be very difficult for women with little to no resources and erratic lifestyles to actually know until a few months in if their only affordable resources are whether they are having a period or not. Not all women are regular in the first place, and a number of factors much more commonly occurring can, and often do, contribute to missing periods.

Of course, the pro-life is not going to look into that or advertise women in these situations as victims in desperate need of help but rather careless neglectful sluts who want to murder babies at their convenience.

Regardless, childcare, childbirth, safe sex, or any retroactive actions to safely and quickly remedy a potential pregnancy into a ...not pregnancy is expensive, with the minimum threshold of a plan B pill being $50, which was expensive for me in college, and simply unrealistic for women on poverty miles away from one.

Republicans thought making this expensive would deter pregnancy. Precisely the opposite, it simply delineates who can afford healthcare related to safe sex, family planning and raising children in a healthy environment, and who cannot, and places all the burdens of societies in ability to provide these things to humans at a minimum level of decency onto the shame/reputations and sluttiness/morality/choices of the mother. The vicous cycle does a great job of perpetuating poverty where poor women in non ideal situations are left with decreasing cycles of access to education, safe and respectful environments and access to knowledge/healthcare.

People who can afford healthcare will get it, even if they have to drive to another state to do so, not everyone can take their husbands landrover and use their health insurance to seek out a doctor highly regarded for safe abortions.

It's just a system that favours the rich.

Also, as a last note, I'm really tired of watching disgusting 50 + yr old politicians have an opinion about what women do with their bodies. It's none of their business. It would be inappropriate in person and it's inappropriate in the context of politics as well.