Search Results: could i be pregnant

If the Supreme Court is going to preserve automatic birthright citizenship, then the government should use every lawful tool available to prevent birth tourism. Denying visas when there is reason to believe someone is coming primarily to give birth is not sexism; it is immigration enforcement.

This policy would not be about punishing women for being pregnant. It would be about preventing people from using pregnancy as a pathway to secure automatic U. S. citizenship for a child. A sovereign country has the right to decide who enters and under what conditions.

- Gonna have to do it the hard way. issue no visas to pregnant women. if a woman has a child here she can never be considered for any kind of visa or green card for the rest of her life. no visas for family members of the child, ever. never allowed in the country again. -

Gonna have to do it the hard way. issue no visas to pregnant women. if a woman has a child here she can never be considered for any kind of visa or green card for the rest of her life. no visas for family members of the child, ever. never allowed in the country again. https://t.co/mDpFr9ivEx

— Phil Labonte 🇺🇸 (@philthatremains) June 30, 2026

My view: Yes, it is fundamentally anti-women.

If the argument is that women need abortion to be equal to men, the implication is that women’s natural ability to become pregnant is a liability or a defect that must be neutralized before they can compete. That does not sound pro-woman. It sounds like measuring women entirely against a male standard and treating motherhood as an obstacle to success. True empowerment shouldn't require women to reject their own biological reality to fit into a system designed around men. Real respect for women should mean honoring women as women, not treating pregnancy and motherhood as problems that must be eliminated.

what do you think? Do you believe saying women need abortion in order to be equal to men is fundamentally anti-women?