First she shows ignorance in describing women who have abortions:
After all, she is in good company—one in every three women gets an abortion, and sixty percent of those women are already married.
Ummm.... nope. Usually around 80-90% of women who have abortions are unmarried. Maybe she's thinking "sixty percent of those women already has a child." Maybe she should have actually done some research instead of just parroting Planned Parenthood.
Then she shows a complete inability to make an argument or for some reason believes cursing at those who disagree with her is in some manner persuasive.
So, I would like to say a few words to all of the Republican (and Democrat) legislators trying to make abortion inaccessible—first through manipulating insurance plans away from covering it, then through enforcing mandatory counseling, mandatory transvaginal ultrasounds designed to guilt women about their choice and then through absurd regulations designed to shut down abortion clinics, making abortion nominally legal but inaccessible.
Those words? (Expletive). You. All.
Then she goes back to ignorance by ridiculously claiming that all prolife legislators are men.
You are all men. You have no idea what it is like to be a woman, and what it is like to be pregnant, not be sure if you are pregnant or even any grasp of how much taking a pregnancy to term affects every aspect of daily life—and then the future thereafter.It's almost as if she can't imagine that women like Kelly Ayotte or Cathy McMorris Rodgers or any of the numerous prolife female state legislators exist.
Then on to an ad hominem. Males have "no role in the abortion debate" except to agree with her even though it appears her knowledge of the topic is exceptional low.
As men who wish to be called men, you have no role in the abortion debate other than to unquestioningly support women in whatever choice they might choose to make.
With a "thought" process like this, you start to see why the pro-choice movement doesn't have the public advocacy strength it once did.