Why Carly Fiorina is anti-choice - Because she couldn't have kids

Abortion stance
In a wide-ranging interview Friday, Fiorina also explained her opposition to abortion rights in the most personal way since her campaign officially started last fall.

"I myself was not able to have children of my own, and so I know what a precious gift life is," Fiorina said. She helped raised two stepchildren, the daughters of her second husband, Frank Fiorina. One, Lori Ann Fiorina, 35, died last year.

"My husband's mother was told to abort him," Fiorina said. "She spent a year in the hospital after his birth. My husband is the joy of her life, and he is the rock of my life. So those experiences have shaped my view.

"I recognize that a lot of women disagree with me on that," Fiorina said. "But I also know that women in general are not single-issue voters. When I talk to women on this, it's not the issue that is on the table in this election."

http://articles.sfgate.com/2010-04-03/news/20833848_1_frank-fiorina-field-poll-sen-feinstein

What flaming nerve deciding she has any right to tell other women what to do.

and I fully support her right to do so.

Pity Carly doesn't.

Problematic.

I mean, who knows how hands on she was about that. On the other hand, I don't think we get to judge her anymore than she gets to judge what people do with their own bodies. I assume she thinks she can win in California despite being pro-life--a position that would keep her viable as a national Republican in 2 or 6 years.

abort her husband. How long ago was that? Very weird. Either way, I couldn't have kids and I'm prop-choice. This rings false to me. Maybe it's because she's going after a distinct segment of the population? :think: I guess she has no history of her views seeing as she's new to all of this.

I mean his daughter is 35, which means that he is at least in his 50's. Abortion wasn't legalized until the 70's. Am I missing something here??

Oh yeah and Carly don't force your opinion on anyone else!!!

butchers, no doubt. I wonder if she thinks that's preferable.

even before Roe. It was just harder to do so as many hospitals required committee approval, not just the word of the woman's doctor (I don't think the woman's opinion mattered at all then). In some cases it was even allowed if there was reason to believe the fetus might be severly damaged - I know a woman who had German measles early in her pregnancy and the hospital ok'd an abortion for her. As it turned out, by the time of the abortion, the fetus had died. She knew someone else in the same situation and whatever hospital that woman was at did not okay the procedure and that woman did deliver a premature infant that did not survive.

They could not give a shit less about abortion, I guarantee you. It doesn't touch them at all. If abortion were completely outlawed today, they'd be one short private jet ride from the procedure. It's something the plebes argue about, so these dilettantes just mouth whatever they need to.

I know for a fact it was possible to obtain an abortion at Gracie Square Hospital in Manhattan if you knew the right people 40 years ago.

I'm guessing since his daughter was 35 last year he's a lot older than 37.

So I'm led to believe she's making this shit up.

In some states, if you could convince a hospital board that another baby would make you insane you could get a therapeutic abortion. I knew a lady who did that, altho she would certainly NOT would have lost her mind if she had; she just didn't think she should handle a 4th child...

I think it depended on the laws of each state as to the latitude of the "therapeutic" abortion...

But here in Kansas there was no way we would have had a law that progressive.

At a vigil for Dr Tiller last year here in KC, a woman came and told about her pregnancy in the 1950s when the fetus died and she couldn't get a doctor to abort her dead fetus. She nearly died from the infection and she was never able to conceive again. So I'm assuming there were no therapeutic abortions here in red state hell.

allowing a therapeutic abortion. CT had a state law against the sale of any form of contraception, hence Griswold v. Connecticut. The Planned Parenthood League would organize carloads of women seeking birth control and drive them to New York, MA or RI to get diaphragms or condoms.

My guess is that hospital boards were left to make their own decisions about a "medically necessary" abortion, but I sure don't know why. The state lege was in the thrall of the Roman Catholic Church...

They both snuck out of their houses in Winfield to get there in the middle of the night, and then snuck right back in their houses.

She described it once to my sister and I; I'll spare others the details. She did say that the instrument was "slightly" more sophisticated than a hanger, but not much.

:shudder:

That's how I found out what abortion was. I heard my grandma and my parents talking about it. My mom wouldn't explain what it meant but my grandma did.

Still makes me sad, nearly 50 years later.

...it simply said that states can't make it illegal.

State laws were all over the map at the time, and generally moving in the direction of legality anyway.

Hint: Strong Catholic.

There was no point in wasting my time talking candidates with them. It is the only issue that matters to them.

She doesn't have enough scruples to have a strong stance either way.

Gross. :puke:

A lot of women, my cousins in California included, are not going to cross the choice line, ever. We're all old enough to remember what it was like before 1974. Many of us are old enough to have friends who were maimed or killed by illegal abortion.

Carly, we're sorry your hubby wouldn't allow you to adopt or that your millions wouldn't buy you the use of someone else's body to gestate your child via IVF. However, don't play your little psychodrama out on women whose circumstances you have no clue about.

Go to hell, Carly. The rest of us have seen what it looks like and we are never going back there.

Bitch.*


*sometimes you do need to identify an inmate of the right wing kennel.

I'm not in CA, but I have NEVER and would NEVER cross the anti-choice line either.

I love when anti-choice wingers try to diminish a woman's right to her own body by dismissing it as a "single issue vote".

It's the single issue that means life and death to us.

Good lord, don't let this woman hating female anywhere near public office.

without a fight?" I usually get a stunned look but occasionally they "try" to answer and it's just downright funny...

:thumbsup:

Nice little throw-away line, that.

It is of no concern to Ms. Fiorina that her husband's mother had to spend ONE YEAR IN THE HOSPITAL after giving birth. Yawn. We must not allow other women to decide that maybe their families need them too much to take that kind of risk. Nope, you've found yourself pregnant and now you MUST produce that baby! Because that baby could grow up to be someone's husband, and they'll be awfully upset should their beloved fail to appear on cue. Or something like that.

Freaking lunatic.

I hope to see her go down in flames. Did I mention how much I really, really dislike the woman?

Carly's a mean shallow rich bitch.

Being a parent requires that you put somebody else's interests ahead of your own. I doubt she has the capacity or willingness to do that.

if you ever want a hope in hell of being a good parent - plenty of people without that capacity want to have kids, often for lots of really fucked up reasons.

assessment that she has neither the capacity nor willingness to do that. I think she probably did sort of want to have kids - but for some of those totally f**ked up reasons. Being childfree myself and a research psychologist, I've done some investigating about this topic. My guess is she falls into the "delay/'I'm not ready yet' until it becomes too late" category of women who don't have children. Given how my sister moved heaven and earth to have kids despite her fertility problems, I'm convinced that any successful woman under the age of about 55 (maybe even 60) who doesn't have kids but claims to have wanted them did really want to be a mother. They liked the idea of having kids in the abstract and wanted them for reasons like fitting some arbitrary criteria of womanhood, having a "mini-me" to live vicariously through, etc., but they didn't REALLY want kids. My old boss is that way (although much nicer than "that one" :))

because she thinks that will get her votes with certain right-wing groups. I doubt she has any strong personal feelings on this - or on any other topic.

What's up with that face?

she said those exact words to me.

I don't know anyone who would subject themselves to a surgical procedure rather than use way less invasive means. If your statement about your friend is true, it's probably best she isn't reproducing.

Hello, I am not going to vote for you just because you have the same parts as me.