Hello Beautiful!

It looks like you're new to The Community. If you'd like to get involved, click one of these buttons!

In this Discussion

Definitely Not a Palin fan

1568101114

Comments

  • JoyceHJoyceH Raw Newbie

    Kevlar, no one wants to ‘murder babies’. Hopefully someday we’ll live in society where the underlying causes of abortion (poverty & unemployment) will be addressed. Two thirds of women who do have abortions feel desperate in their economic situations. I pray that these women will someday have accessible health care, education and the ability to support themselves by earning a fair and livable wage. The current administration has done nothing in these regards…lets hope for a brighter future for everyone.

  • KevlarKevlar Raw Newbie

    Any mother can drop her baby off at the nearest hospital for immediate adoption.

  • RawKidChefRawKidChef Raw Newbie

    One of my biggest concerns about Palin is that she won’t fix they energy crisis, and therefore the economy.

  • TomsMomTomsMom Raw Newbie

    What a lot of naive remarks about pregnancy and women in this thread. American women have the right to terminate their pregnancies. The end. It’s sickening that the loudest advocates to take away the rights of women are often the same people who scream for the murder of foreign children, and drool venom with every penny of tax they pay. It’s amazing that those who claim to love the unborn can have such unending hatred for living babies, the aged and the disabled.

    Of course abortion is ending a life. But there has to be a choice. If you don’t like it, then do what you obviously do best: turn your backs and walk away.

  • KevlarKevlar Raw Newbie

    Here comes TomsMom to inject a bit of misplaced hostility.

  • TomsMomTomsMom Raw Newbie

    Kevlar, deal with your insecurities.

  • TomsMom is 100% regarding the oversimplified answers of ‘take a morning after pill if you’re raped,’ and ‘just carry the baby and drop it off at the hospital when it’s born.’ i don’t find her hostile – i find her frustrated, as many are at this discussion. it seems like all you want to do is assert your opinion – over and over again – and always without room for opposing views. you know all – abortion is murder, our government is a group of murderers – we’re all going to run out of food and have to murder each other to protect our backyard garden plots. all of your beliefs are stated as incontrovertible facts with your claims that you’ve ‘done the research’ and that if everyone did that research, they would understand you are right. you don’t seem to get beyond your positions – abortion is immoral and murder – and look at realities – making abortion illegal does not make abortion scarce – it just makes it a hell of a lot more dangerous. some of us see a little bit more hope in the world around us than you do. and i really do believe that the republican rule in this country is going to come to a close in a few short months. i guess that makes me an idiot, beause of course the voting machines will be hacked and i’m an idiot for thinking i play any role in my government.

  • KevlarKevlar Raw Newbie

    I’m open to your ideas, Dagny, I just happen to disagree with most of them. I’m just trying to have a discussion here, not trying to preach to anyone, and I’m sorry if you interpret it that way, but I don’t appreciate you putting words in my mouth.

  • RawKRawK Raw Newbie

    how is it misplaced, kevlar? keep your laws to yourself and everybody is happy. you are here now, lets not deal in silly hypotheticals. enjoy the life you have, let me and the rest of us live ours.

    dagny and tomsmom, excellent takes—agree wholeheartedly.

  • KevlarKevlar Raw Newbie

    It’s misplaced because I expressed my opinion without resorting to hostility, and instead of getting a rational response to what I said, I’m being attacked.

  • MeditatingMeditating Raw Newbie

    KEVLAR – I doubt that anyone who believes forcing women into unwanted childbirth does so without the influence of religious ideology if not direct religious beliefs.

    It is long-held religious beliefs that influence a society to view women as less deserving than their male counterparts. Religious beliefs, especially when a single religion is predominant in a region, are imprinted on the culture such that they are indistinguishable from societal beliefs. Those unable to filter out these influences need not consciously subscribe to their religious origins. You don’t have to affiliate yourself with a religions belief to co-opt its cultural leanings. (Christian beliefs/rituals are founded on pagan beliefs/rituals, yet most christians don’t realize it and would express disbelief if forced to confront the fact.) Asserting that women should be forced to bear children under any circumstance is a testament to the religious underpinnings that limit the role of women: Women should either be punished for the failure of chastity or they are nothing more than a piece of real estate whose highest and best use is to birth future generations.

    You may think that abortion is the murder of a child and you are entitled to do so, but there is no consensus as to when personage begins, even among major religions. The ability to experience consciousness, as humans experience it, and the ability to be viable apart from one’s birthmother have served as the most appropriate measures of human existence.

    Scientific studies indicate the brain waves for human consciousness mature in the third-trimester, which is also when a fetus may become viable without the mandatory use of a birthmother. This is why there are limitations to abortion in the third trimester because the possibility of personage is at hand. An all-or-nothing anti-abortion stance assumes the position that the women is never deserving of consideration unless she may die. But for this exception, we would be openly dismissing the value of women altogether. It has been politically feasible to covertly diminish a woman’s value but unacceptable to proclaim it outright.

    Your argument comparing abortion to the planned execution of a child is seriously flawed in two ways.

    First, there is no doubt that a child already born is an established person. There is no guarantee that any fetus, left to its normal course, will come to term and achieve personhood. I take no issue with someone who chooses to view a fetus as a person as long as they don’t demean the value of the woman in the process. The argument that a fetus is a more deserving person and warrants the only consideration necessarily obliterates the value of the woman.

    Second, there is no competing interest in your scenario. It is difficult to model an example of the autonomy lost by pregnant women to men since their lives are not controlled by pregnancy.

    Imagine that you go to bed at night and wake up to find that your house was infiltrated by a group of dedicated medical students. They seek to save the life of their cherished professor, who is unfortunately on the verge of multiple organ failure. You were anesthetized while you slept and the professor’s kidneys, heart, and lungs were connected to yours. You experience discomfort and limited mobility, although you can move about as long as you take the professor with you. You aren’t going to die but your autonomy is gone, you can no longer do with your physical body what you would like to, and your employment opportunities are slim.

    If you are disconnected from the professor, he will promptly die. Unlike a fetus, the professor clearly has identifiable personage. Therefore, the professor has a greater right to continue his existence at your expense.

    What arguments can you present as to why you should be allowed to disconnect yourself and reclaim your life at the expense of the professor? Is it just for you to remain in these circumstances? Should you be entitled to freedom because you a victim and not responsible for your circumstances? Now really, if you were truly responsible wouldn’t you have installed a better security system? What difference would it make anyway given that the professor would die?

    We have numerous laws on the books intended to support the autonomy of disabled persons, including the severally mentally retarded. They are afforded the same rights as everyone else to reproduce or terminate their pregnancies. The supporting reasons to allow pregnancy terminations is these cases is the inability to care for and raise children. Few would suggest they should endure forced pregnancy and the ensuing emotional strife of birthing children to have them forcibly removed forever. What factors caused us to identify the judgment of women as so impaired government intervention was required? Are women vaginally disabled? If so, shouldn’t they at least be offered the same considerations as the mentally retarded? Many would argue that the best course is forced pregnancy and place the child with deserving parents. Haven’t we just reduced the woman to nothing more than a biological piece of machinery used to obtain the goals of others?

    US law clearly delineates between the value of humans vs. the value of animals. I am sure many, particularly on this site, disagree with that position and see no difference. As long as there is no competing interest between the two, I would agree. However, if I found myself in a situation where I have the opportunity to save either a cute puppy or a physically unattractive human being, I will always choose the human being. I don’t think that indicates impaired judgment on my part.

    Unfortunately, animals do not have a choice. They have no choice and the are regularly impregnated and forced to produce offspring for the benefit of others. Our society has determined that cattle and such are wholly undeserving of their right to a free life. If you were to research the early property laws in this country, most are based on disputes regarding the ownership of slaves. It is horrific to read how human beings, those whose personage should not be in dispute, were reduced to the likes of cattle and denied any right to run their own lives.

    Kevlar, let me end by saying that while you can respect the value of a fetus because you were once a fetus, it is a shame you weren’t once a woman. Then perhaps you would understand why women, especially those facing an unwanted pregnancy, should be afforded rights that place them above livestock.

  • i think you are being terribly disingenuous. as i wrote above, i do not believe that you are seeking honest debate and i further feel that many of your posts are purposefully antagonistic and intolerate of differing views. i get the feeling that you enjoy being a contrarian and getting people riled up. i do not think you are genuinely open to my ‘ideas,’ and why is that? because we’re on different sides of the debate over whether abortion should be legal and safe?

  • KevlarKevlar Raw Newbie

    Um, I didn’t read your whole essay, but there are plenty of women who are anti-abortion (and atheists.)

  • Applause, Meditating.

  • You’re seeking ‘rational responses’ to your arguments yet you are compelled to reply without reading Meditating’s ‘whole essay.’

  • KevlarKevlar Raw Newbie

    Yeah, sorry, I don’t read essay posts.

    Ah, screw it, I’ll respond anyway:

    Meditating wrote: “I doubt that anyone who believes forcing women into unwanted childbirth does so without the influence of religious ideology if not direct religious beliefs.”

    If you doubt my atheism, let me just say, I deny the holy spirit.

    And I never said I believed in forcing women into unwanted childbirth. Women force that upon themselves when they fail to use protection, or fail to have their partner use protection.

    Meditating wrote: “It is long-held religious beliefs that influence a society to view women as less deserving than their male counterparts. Religious beliefs, especially when a single religion is predominant in a region, are imprinted on the culture such that they are indistinguishable from societal beliefs. Those unable to filter out these influences need not consciously subscribe to their religious origins. You don’t have to affiliate yourself with a religions belief to co-opt its cultural leanings. (Christian beliefs/rituals are founded on pagan beliefs/rituals, yet most christians don’t realize it and would express disbelief if forced to confront the fact.) Asserting that women should be forced to bear children under any circumstance is a testament to the religious underpinnings that limit the role of women: Women should either be punished for the failure of chastity or they are nothing more than a piece of real estate whose highest and best use is to birth future generations.”

    I don’t subscribe to the Republican ideas of preemptive war, or the villainization of Muslims, so why would you accuse me of being influenced by Christians’ pro-life stances? And “asserting that women should be forced to bear children under any circumstance” is something I never did.

    Meditating wrote: “You may think that abortion is the murder of a child and you are entitled to do so, but there is no consensus as to when personage begins, even among major religions. The ability to experience consciousness, as humans experience it, and the ability to be viable apart from one’s birthmother have served as the most appropriate measures of human existence.

    Scientific studies indicate the brain waves for human consciousness mature in the third-trimester, which is also when a fetus may become viable without the mandatory use of a birthmother. This is why there are limitations to abortion in the third trimester because the possibility of personage is at hand. An all-or-nothing anti-abortion stance assumes the position that the women is never deserving of consideration unless she may die. But for this exception, we would be openly dismissing the value of women altogether. It has been politically feasible to covertly diminish a woman’s value but unacceptable to proclaim it outright.

    Your argument comparing abortion to the planned execution of a child is seriously flawed in two ways.

    First, there is no doubt that a child already born is an established person. There is no guarantee that any fetus, left to its normal course, will come to term and achieve personhood. I take no issue with someone who chooses to view a fetus as a person as long as they don’t demean the value of the woman in the process. The argument that a fetus is a more deserving person and warrants the only consideration necessarily obliterates the value of the woman.”

    If there’s any doubt about it, shouldn’t that be enough to protect people’s lives? I, personally, think that life begins when it takes a metal tube and a vacuum cleaner to end it, but that’s just me. A one-year-old baby is not viable apart from its mother either. It still needs to be breastfed. Shouldn’t the mother have the choice to let the baby starve? It is her milk, and her body.

    Meditating wrote: “Second, there is no competing interest in your scenario. It is difficult to model an example of the autonomy lost by pregnant women to men since their lives are not controlled by pregnancy.

    Imagine that you go to bed at night and wake up to find that your house was infiltrated by a group of dedicated medical students. They seek to save the life of their cherished professor, who is unfortunately on the verge of multiple organ failure. You were anesthetized while you slept and the professor’s kidneys, heart, and lungs were connected to yours. You experience discomfort and limited mobility, although you can move about as long as you take the professor with you. You aren’t going to die but your autonomy is gone, you can no longer do with your physical body what you would like to, and your employment opportunities are slim.

    If you are disconnected from the professor, he will promptly die. Unlike a fetus, the professor clearly has identifiable personage. Therefore, the professor has a greater right to continue his existence at your expense.”

    What arguments can you present as to why you should be allowed to disconnect yourself and reclaim your life at the expense of the professor? Is it just for you to remain in these circumstances? Should you be entitled to freedom because you a victim and not responsible for your circumstances? Now really, if you were truly responsible wouldn’t you have installed a better security system? What difference would it make anyway given that the professor would die?

    If you changed your story, so that the person signed a contract agreeing to have the professor hooked up to him (by not using a condom), your example would be fitting.

    “We have numerous laws on the books intended to support the autonomy of disabled persons, including the severally mentally retarded. They are afforded the same rights as everyone else to reproduce or terminate their pregnancies. The supporting reasons to allow pregnancy terminations is these cases is the inability to care for and raise children. Few would suggest they should endure forced pregnancy and the ensuing emotional strife of birthing children to have them forcibly removed forever. What factors caused us to identify the judgment of women as so impaired government intervention was required? Are women vaginally disabled? If so, shouldn’t they at least be offered the same considerations as the mentally retarded? Many would argue that the best course is forced pregnancy and place the child with deserving parents. Haven’t we just reduced the woman to nothing more than a biological piece of machinery used to obtain the goals of others?”

    No, the woman did that. And the lack of responsibility (to either have your partner wear a condom or to not have sex with him) does not qualify as a disability, in my opinion. Neither does the lack of ability to raise the child (adoption again).

    Meditating wrote: “US law clearly delineates between the value of humans vs. the value of animals. I am sure many, particularly on this site, disagree with that position and see no difference. As long as there is no competing interest between the two, I would agree. However, if I found myself in a situation where I have the opportunity to save either a cute puppy or a physically unattractive human being, I will always choose the human being. I don’t think that indicates impaired judgment on my part.

    Unfortunately, animals do not have a choice. They have no choice and the are regularly impregnated and forced to produce offspring for the benefit of others. Our society has determined that cattle and such are wholly undeserving of their right to a free life. If you were to research the early property laws in this country, most are based on disputes regarding the ownership of slaves. It is horrific to read how human beings, those whose personage should not be in dispute, were reduced to the likes of cattle and denied any right to run their own lives.”

    Animals do not know how to use condoms. Women are not locked in a pen and forcibly impregnated. They are free beings, and responsible for the consequences of their own actions (pregnancy).

    Meditating wrote: “Kevlar, let me end by saying that while you can respect the value of a fetus because you were once a fetus, it is a shame you weren’t once a woman. Then perhaps you would understand why women, especially those facing an unwanted pregnancy, should be afforded rights that place them above livestock.”

    Let me conclude by repeating that there are plenty of females who are against abortion. Being anti-abortion is not a uniquely male phenomenon, to say the least. I’ve always used protection, so I’ve done my part.

  • greenghostgreenghost Raw Newbie

    Meditating you are amazingly lucid, articulate, and clear. I’m tempted to say ‘amen’, but I am not religious and I know that others would find it very facetious. So I’ll simply say cheers to you & dagny for presenting points that illuminate the intricacies and the importance of the right to choose.

  • It’s true. Man-made global warming is a lie (as far as I’ve been able to determine.)

    Google: “global warming mars”

    Google: “global carbon tax”

    Youtube: “the great global warming swindle”

    I’m not saying humans aren’t messing up the planet, but this global warming hysteria is distracting us from real environmental problems (like genetic engineering, deforestation, overfishing, etc.)

    Kevlar- you’re right about gloabl warming. Global warming is ocurring and WILL occur no matter what we humans do.. BUT we humans HAVE contributed to the phenomenom and sped it up by at least a hundred years. And we still should do everything we can to try to prevent as much catastrophe to us and our planet from it as possible by respecting and honoring Earth’s resources and environment.

    From what I understand, the Earth (and all the planets in our solar sytem) rotates around the sun in an elliptical pattern, not simply a perfect circle shape- more of an enlongated oval shaped orbit. This causes Earth to be at different distances from the sun as it travels this elliptical orbit. Some point on the oval will be closest to the sun, while another point on the oval pattern will be furthest from the sun. Right now we are at the furthest point, called the Kali Yuga meaning the “darkest” cyle by the ancient Hindus, getting ready to enter the pahse of the point clsoest to the sun. (Interesting how many of the indigenous and ancient cultures like Egyptians, Sumerians, Mayans, Hopi Native American Indians, Hindus, Aboriginees, ect understood this and yet our scientists are just recently discovering much of what they already understood and foretold and/or left pictures and writings about for us.) One completed orbit takes 25,625 years (which most times is rounded off to 26,000 years to make discussing it easier). This is called the “Procession of the Equinoxes” and correlates to which celestial zodiac constellation (which all 12 remain constant in their postition unlike our planets) is most visible to us on Earth at that time. We are entering the Age of Aquarius, getting ready to leave the Age of Pisces. The 25,625 years are divided into 4 segments, called “World Ages” and are 5,125 years long. The importance of understanding this is that the change in World Ages bring global changes in Earth’s magnetic fields (poles), therby causing changes in Earth’s environment, humans, and everything else here on Earth. It’s happened many times before. That’s why we have tropical rain forrests flash frozen thousands of feet underneath Alaskan glaciers; dug up the tropical plants are still green and were obviously frozen in a super fast calamity of environmental change. It is also a known fact by sicentists that the poles have shifted before numerous times in the past, as it is doing now. Change in the poles brings about a shifting of temperatures, weather anomolies, water level and landmass changes. It is a fact we are going through the change of the World Ages, but it is also true we are going through a change in the Procession of the Equinox, too. We have been through each change seperately before, but as far as scientists are able to determine, we have never been through BOTH a change in the Procession of the Equinox AND a change in the World Ages at the same time, which is where we are now. That is why it is such a big deal for us, as individuals, to be living at this stage in history. But all in all, Earth is experiencing global warming as we enter into the point of being closest to the sun, allowing more radiant energy into our atmosphere. But since it is a cycle, Earth will come out of it in time, too. Because of all this, it is most important to realize that we will need each other in order to survive and still thrive throughout all this change. Some places will need more food, some places will new seeds, some places will need more water, and so on and if we can learn to help one another, be unified and compassionate towards each other instead of remaining seperate and cut off from each other, other countries, other people, other cultures, and other places we can help each other out instead of suffering unneedingly.

    *I am writing this off of memory from readings and lectures/seminars, so I would encourage anyone reading this to, as always, do your own research into it.

  • Meditating- bravo. Brilliant, as usual.

  • KevlarKevlar Raw Newbie

    Thanks for the confirmation, aspire.

    My intention wasn’t to start a debate about the causes of global warming though. The point was, don’t just believe what Al Gore tells you. Do some checking for yourself.

    I updated my response to Meditating.

  • KevlarKevlar Raw Newbie

    DagnyTaggart wrote: “TomsMom is 100% regarding the oversimplified answers of ‘take a morning after pill if you’re raped,’ and ‘just carry the baby and drop it off at the hospital when it’s born.’ i don’t find her hostile – i find her frustrated, as many are at this discussion. it seems like all you want to do is assert your opinion – over and over again – and always without room for opposing views.”

    I always listen to opposing views.

    DagnyTaggart wrote: “you know all – abortion is murder,”

    It is.

    DagnyTaggart wrote: “our government is a group of murderers”

    Not all of them, but the ones at the top are.

    DagnyTaggart wrote: ”- we’re all going to run out of food and have to murder each other to protect our backyard garden plots.”

    Not necessarily, but it helps to be prepared.

    DagnyTaggart wrote: “all of your beliefs are stated as incontrovertible facts with your claims that you’ve ‘done the research’ and that if everyone did that research, they would understand you are right.”

    Never said that.

    DagnyTaggart wrote: “you don’t seem to get beyond your positions – abortion is immoral and murder – and look at realities – making abortion illegal does not make abortion scarce – it just makes it a hell of a lot more dangerous.”

    That’s like saying: “making murder illegal does not make murder scarce – it just makes it a hell of a lot more dangerous.”

    DagnyTaggart wrote: “some of us see a little bit more hope in the world around us than you do. and i really do believe that the republican rule in this country is going to come to a close in a few short months.”

    Don’t hold your breath.

    DagnyTaggart wrote: “i guess that makes me an idiot, beause of course the voting machines will be hacked and i’m an idiot for thinking i play any role in my government.”

    Ummmmmm… ever heard of Diebold?

  • omshantiomshanti Raw Newbie

    kevlar, To be honest my knee jerk reaction to most of your posts on this thread are, shall we say, colorful, so i leave the presentation of opposing opinions to people much more inclined to thoughtful prose like dagny and meditating.

    since research seems to be your forte, which hospital is that exactly where a woman can abandon her viable fetus for “immediate” adoption? The address and location would be a welcome resourse thats bears publishing.

  • TomsMomTomsMom Raw Newbie

    Thank you for your posts, DagnyTaggart:-)

    And RawK, too:-)

  • KevlarKevlar Raw Newbie

    If your beliefs were strong, omshanti, you wouldn’t be offended by mine.

    But that’s the last I’ll say about the whole abortion thing.

    I feel like a person standing in front of an angry mob of villagers, trying to explain to them why it’s wrong to burn people at the stake for witchcraft, only to be called a witch.

  • omshantiomshanti Raw Newbie

    kev, I dont believe i stated that i was “offended” by your beliefs nor that my own where not iron clad, I just like to mutter “dumb ass” or “yeah! what she said” at my computer screen!....not a very effective discusion technique I realize, so therefore my own lips, for the most part, stay sealed… You know the saying “never try to teach a pig to sing, you waste your time and annoy the pig”....advise well matched for this whole abortion debate be it religiously or feminis-ty(is that a word?) motivated. This like gay marriage, veganism, politics and religion should not be broached in polite company;0) Im bummed though now that “the villagers” have frightened you off with their rotten tomatoes, i guess ill never learn of that magical california hospital that has such an easy time placeing all those babies springing from the loins of young harlots willy nilly. Im sure your ego stings a little, there are some pretty good “touche miseuor pussy cat” moments here. But unlike myself you do present another side of a coin and i can respect that ability.

    buenas noches!

  • KevlarKevlar Raw Newbie

    There’s nothing anyone could say to me on the internet that could bruise my “ego” if I even have such a thing.

    http://www.ehow.com/how_2267121_drop-off-unwant…

    That’s how you drop off an unwanted baby.

  • RawKidChefRawKidChef Raw Newbie

    I agree that should be illegal kevlar

  • omshantiomshanti Raw Newbie

    Kev how quaint on the baby drop off thing…i believe ill do a little research tomarrow and find out EXACTLY where said”safe haven ” babys end up..my guess, in foster care on the system, not adopted to a loving home “immediately”...anyhow its a tiny point i chose to pick at… well theres one more but ill let the psyco babble about ego go ….its boring any way and hard to crack wise about. Im going to bed and leaving this thread to the big dogs…...G’day

  • omshantiomshanti Raw Newbie

    Im not bashing this at all good that there are options, i read all the bylaws for this and parental anonimity and exemption from prosecution for child abandonment is excersized unless the child show signs of abuse…the maximum age of said child varies form state to state. and in most states they must be dropped off by a parent usually the mother….. now the sad part is there is a grace period for reclamation of the child that also varies from state to state can be as long as 8 months to a year, the legal adoption process requires termination of parental rights first then the adoption process which again can be lengthy. If it all goes swimmingly then great, kid happy new parents happy, old parents relieved and moving on…..lets all pray for that outcome!

    fyi on safe haven laws for unwanted babys:

    Consequences of Relinquishment Once the safe haven provider has notified the local child welfare department that an infant has been relinquished, the department assumes custody of the infant as an abandoned child. The department has responsibility for placing the infant, usually in a preadoptive home, and for petitioning the court for termination of the birth parent’s parental rights. Before the baby is placed in a preadoptive home, 12 States require the department to request the local law enforcement agency to determine whether the baby has been reported as missing.

  • I think everyone has valid views on here, its almost too hard to argue, but I am with Kevlar on the abortion front. If I had to go out and kill a sheep in order to eat, I know I couldn’t do it and there are plenty of people who feel the same, even though they can go to the supermarket and obtain it cleanly packaged. We can ‘talk’ about abortion, but I have seen the ultrasounds of the foetuses that are up for termination and I have seen the emotion on the faces of those women who have made their ‘choices’ and it is heartbreaking. The actual act of abortion has the same difficulties as having to kill the sheep. The choice is almost impossible the first time around. Actually, it was not a choice they really wanted to make in many cases. Many of them were misinformed and also, not given all the facts about alternatives. I agree, women should not be controlled by childbearing but in this day and age, it should be possible to avoid this control. I totally agree women should not have to bear the consequences of rape, but these are special cases. I know I will be shouted down for my views and it is not as if I don’t agree with ‘pro-choice’, but I have witnessed its effect both physical and emotional, on those women who have had to go through it.

Sign In or Register to comment.