I have no opinion / haven’t looked into there being an adoption industry that lobbies against abortion, or adoption being significantly worse for kids than is widely believed.
However, most of the people I know who are happy about the ruling (which is most of the people I know) are not interested in adoption and it has little or nothing to do with their activism against abortion. They view adoption as merely a less-bad outcome to unwanted pregnancy than abortion.
What the anti-abortion people I know want are things like:
- Less unmarried sexual activity. Especially among teens.
- Laws that treat fetuses as what they think their religion says they are (human souls)
- Increased child-bearing / fertility
- Virtue signalling about how religious they are
- Virtue signalling about how much they love their kids (how much worse off they’d be if they’d had an abortion)
- Tribal solidarity (conservative = against abortion, I’m conservative, therefore I must be against abortion)
- Force non-religious to sacrifice they way they did as a result of unmarried sex (ex: quick wedding to someone you’d otherwise not marry, raise unwanted kids)
Small sample size of course.
Roe v. Wade was astonishingly bad law from the beginning. It was the Court’s foremost example of contrived reasoning to reach a predetermined conclusion, setting a precedent for many similarly poorly argued decisions later. The Justices who voted to overturn it even likened it to the infamous 1896 decision Plessy v. Ferguson , which found a constitutional right to racial segregation.
But now what? Roe was based on federal overreach and shoddy reasoning, and the adherents of both are still very much with us. On Thursday, alleged Vice President Kamala Harris met with the attorneys general of Wisconsin, Nevada, Illinois, California, Delaware, New York and Washington state at the White House to discuss post-Roe strategies:
If legal avenues fail, there is always the Left’s other favored weapon of choice: violence.
Also from Frontpage Magazine’s current front page:
And make sure to watch our 10-Part Series on The Hidden Agenda Behind the “Pandemic”.
Scare quotes on “pandemic”? Vaccine conspiracies?
On the topic of older male control over female bodies:
An article on some problems with trying to enforce abortion bans:
An article about why late term abortions are sometimes necessary:
Some girls will take risks, like hitch hiking, to travel.
Is there a reason you specified girls instead of women?
I thought this was a very interesting article, thanks for sharing.
I can’t speak for Elliot. But when I imagine people who need abortions and don’t have any access to transportation (no car, no ability to get or rent a car, no friends with a car who can drive them, no money to take a bus or train or airplane, etc), I imagine that would apply to more girls than women. I don’t know the actual statistics or numbers though. But the paragraph did start out by talking about teens, who are more properly called “girls” than “women”.
(You could also just say something like “people”, which includes both girls and women. A lot of anti-trans people are against saying things like “people who need abortions” or “people who menstruate” or “pregnant people”. But all of those terms are more inclusive than saying “women” even if you ignore trans people: girls can get pregnant, menstruate, and have abortions too, and are not properly included in the term “women”.)
I would be surprised if children under the age of 18 could get an abortion without their parents present. But I don’t live in the US so I’m not familiar with the laws. I think plenty of women (not just teens) will also have similar difficulties with traveling to access an abortion.
I think if they’re over 18 they should be called women. In general, I notice people use the word girls when they mean women very often. I rarely see people referring to adult men as boys. I think it’s a double standard many people have that infantilizes grown adults.
This is easily searchable online. Children under the age of 18 definitely can get abortions in the US without their parents present. It depends on the state though: some states require parental consent, some require parental notification, some of those states have alternate ways around those laws, and some states don’t require any parental consent or notification.
It is possible for children to travel to another state and get an abortion in a state that does allow it, even if their home state requires parental consent though.
I agree that there are adults who would have difficulties travelling to get an abortion. But I think it is a minority of adults who have those problems, while a much larger proportion of minor children would have those kinds of problems.
Minor children can’t rent cars. They can’t even rent hotel rooms. They can’t have their own credit cards or even open bank accounts on their own. So they can’t even have an Uber account outside of their parents control. They have truancy laws, so they can’t work very much even if they wanted to. And when they do have jobs, they often have the money being direct deposited into bank accounts that are directly controlled by their parents (since they can’t open their own bank accounts). So even if they have been working and saving up money, they still wouldn’t be able to access and use that money to get an abortion without their parents knowledge or consent.
Children also have less access to the internet. They often have their phones controlled and monitored by their parents. So they are less able to access online resources that are set up to help women obtain abortions or to allow them to order abortion pills online. (And even if they can access them, they are going to have more trouble because of things like being unable to receive funds directly.)
And even if the child has insurance that would cover their abortion, they might not actually be able to use it. Children would be under their parents insurance, and most states require that the insurance holder get notification of everything done under the insurance. A few states do have confidentiality laws in place to protect minors and stop their parents from getting notification of sensitive issues. But those aren’t perfect either: some of them require writing to the company to request privacy. Some will still mail the information, they will just mail it to the child’s name instead of the adult. But many children don’t have mail privacy. And the insurance holder would still be able to see things like how much has been applied to the deductible or the max out of pocket for their insurance, they just wouldn’t be able to see what the procedure was.
The fact that it is harder for minors to get abortion on their insurance would also make them more likely to need to travel to get abortions: they might need to find a cheaper place, or a place that will do their abortion for free. And they have more hurdles to travel than adults.
I see people call males over 18 “boys” all the time. I have actually read commentary that seems to say the opposite of what you are saying: that the double standard is that adult males get called “boys”, while female children get referred to as “underage women”. I haven’t analyzed the language use enough to know whether there is a strong bias in one direction, but I definitely have seen, e.g., college-aged males referred to as “boys”, and I have seen minor females referred to as “women” or “underage women”. (I have also seen adult women referred to as “girls”, and male children referred to as “young men”.)
Many adults refer to themselves or their friends as “girls” or “boys”. Like “just out with the boys” or “the girls and I are having brunch”, etc. And the terms “boyfriend” and “girlfriend” refer to adults as well as children. If you think those terms should change, I think you need to put a lot more serious work into understanding the issue and presenting your case. I am not actually recommending that as a project though. Just saying those things are built into the language, and I don’t think you understand them well enough to be advocating for major linguistic changes.
Stories about pro-life women getting abortions.
Pro-lifers are the same sort of people who are more likely to dislike and oppose anti-aging longevity research.
It’s not about life.
Pregnant woman shot then charged for miscarrying (2019 in USA).
An article about women being prosecuted or investigated for abortions and still births in the UK: