|
|
Post by 3catcircus on Jun 25, 2022 20:46:23 GMT
This is not about control over anyone's body. This entire debate is about the murder of children. Either you believe that life begins at conception and it's murder to kill the baby, or you believe it's a clump of cells until such time as it's convenient to call it a baby so as to not have to face that it could be the murder of an infant. It's a true dichotomy and no part of it is about controlling a woman or removal of choice. You don't get to assert the terms of the debate. Your perspective is a crass, binary reductio ad absurdum because you lack the cognitive tools necessary to hold a more nuanced view. Like I said, too subtle for you. Go ahead and tell us you would be outraged if someone was charged with two murders for shooting a pregnant woman... You can't have it both ways - either it's murder or it's not. The SCOTUS simply said that's it's up to the states (hence the individual voters of those states) to decide for themselves - and I note that the states which currently have the most "outraged" protestors who started rioting yesterday are the same states that have *not* outlawed abortion. But this isn't about legal, safe, and rare. It's about laziness and apathy on the part of people engaged in adult activities and not wanting the adult responsibilities that go with it. Even though the data clearly shows the majority (98+%) of abortions have been for convenience, the left continues to play on the emotions of the useful idiot leftists. It's not going to work anymore. |
|
|
|
Post by 3catcircus on Jun 25, 2022 20:50:28 GMT
Except no part of it is about control. It IS. It is about whether you have the ability to control whether you provide what another life needs. If you're forced to do that, there is most definitely a loss of control of your own body. And before some jackass talks about responsibility prior to pregnancy, fuck off. There are many situations where the woman actually doesn't have the amount of control that she should have. And it's not just rape. Even a properly used condom breaks. Men remove them without telling women (IMO, that's pretty damned close to rape). Birth control fails. I would honestly be ok with limiting abortion after quickening to medical necessity, but ONLY if abortion, sex ed (including how to use contraceptives and about abortion), and contraceptives were easily available everywhere. If states are gonna continue with their bullshit requirements regarding abortions, that's simply a non-starter. Abortion is a health issue for women. For ANY health issue to be under the purview of states' rights is fucking ridiculous. How are contraceptives not easily available??!? You can walk into any drugstore, bodega, convenience store, supermarket, or big box store and walk out with contraceptives. Oh - you mean you want *me the taxpayer* to foot the bill for what is *your* responsibility as an adult? Or you mean that buying contraceptives is embarrassing to you? If you can't handle buying contraceptives, you shouldn't be having intercourse to begin with |
|
|
|
Post by libtard on Jun 25, 2022 21:38:46 GMT
Charging someone with two murders would be grossly inappropriate.
I don't wish to, and it's not.
I understand the legalistic argument. It remains a moral failure.
Western democracies recognize the fact that allowing elective abortions is a social good. Western democracies don't have a vocal contingent of theocratic wannabes and a broken political system which facilitates this kind of bullshit like the US.
Expecting dumb people who are victims of a broken education system and who lack critical thinking skills to unfailingly make "responsible" choices about their "adult activities" in order to avert an invented moral dilemma by repressed fundies is unrealistic.
And 2% of 600,000 is still 12,000 unwanted pregnancies every year which are not "convenience" abortions - although economic hardship is hardly "convenience," but we'll gloss that. Around half of those - 6,000 - are pregnancies caused through rape.
But those three pedo drag queens - man, society is collapsing.
|
|
|
|
Post by cyphersmith on Jun 25, 2022 22:46:16 GMT
It IS. It is about whether you have the ability to control whether you provide what another life needs. If you're forced to do that, there is most definitely a loss of control of your own body. And before some jackass talks about responsibility prior to pregnancy, fuck off. There are many situations where the woman actually doesn't have the amount of control that she should have. And it's not just rape. Even a properly used condom breaks. Men remove them without telling women (IMO, that's pretty damned close to rape). Birth control fails. I would honestly be ok with limiting abortion after quickening to medical necessity, but ONLY if abortion, sex ed (including how to use contraceptives and about abortion), and contraceptives were easily available everywhere. If states are gonna continue with their bullshit requirements regarding abortions, that's simply a non-starter. Abortion is a health issue for women. For ANY health issue to be under the purview of states' rights is fucking ridiculous. How are contraceptives not easily available??!? You can walk into any drugstore, bodega, convenience store, supermarket, or big box store and walk out with contraceptives. Oh - you mean you want *me the taxpayer* to foot the bill for what is *your* responsibility as an adult? Or you mean that buying contraceptives is embarrassing to you? If you can't handle buying contraceptives, you shouldn't be having intercourse to begin with Not for everyone, asshole. Prophylactics should be available for everyone easily without any age restrictions. And yes, it should be part of what is covered with insurance if it's a prescription, or requires a doctor to put it in. And yes, that should include the morning after pill. And yes, that insurance should be M4A, but that's another fucking thing entirely. I note that you didn't say shit about the other two things. Let me expand on one of them. You should not be allowed to exempt your kid from sex ed. Not even a religious exemption should be allowed. It should cover how sex works, how to use all types of contraceptives, and it should cover abortion and everything about it. Information and availability will decrease abortions. Making it illegal WILL NOT. It will just kill more women. |
|
|
|
Post by Maxperson on Jun 26, 2022 0:04:58 GMT
This is not about control over anyone's body. This entire debate is about the murder of children. Either you believe that life begins at conception and it's murder to kill the baby, or you believe it's a clump of cells until such time as it's convenient to call it a baby so as to not have to face that it could be the murder of an infant. It's a true dichotomy and no part of it is about controlling a woman or removal of choice. You don't get to assert the terms of the debate. Your perspective is a crass, binary reductio ad absurdum because you lack the cognitive tools necessary to hold a more nuanced view. Like I said, too subtle for you. I'm not. YOU are. You don't get to tell us that it's about control bud. It's not. It's about murdering babies. End of story. Control. Choice. Those are Strawmen/Red Herrings your side throws up to try and "win" the debate. |
|
|
|
Post by Maxperson on Jun 26, 2022 0:06:53 GMT
Except no part of it is about control. It IS. It is about whether you have the ability to control whether you provide what another life needs. If you're forced to do that, there is most definitely a loss of control of your own body. And before some jackass talks about responsibility prior to pregnancy, fuck off. There are many situations where the woman actually doesn't have the amount of control that she should have. And it's not just rape. Even a properly used condom breaks. Men remove them without telling women (IMO, that's pretty damned close to rape). Birth control fails. I would honestly be ok with limiting abortion after quickening to medical necessity, but ONLY if abortion, sex ed (including how to use contraceptives and about abortion), and contraceptives were easily available everywhere. If states are gonna continue with their bullshit requirements regarding abortions, that's simply a non-starter. Abortion is a health issue for women. For ANY health issue to be under the purview of states' rights is fucking ridiculous. You don't get to dictate to us what it's about. The ONLY thing it's about is stopping the murder of babies. The rest is sophistry on your part to try and reframe things into something you think you can win. |
|
|
|
Post by Maxperson on Jun 26, 2022 0:08:46 GMT
It IS. It is about whether you have the ability to control whether you provide what another life needs. If you're forced to do that, there is most definitely a loss of control of your own body. And before some jackass talks about responsibility prior to pregnancy, fuck off. There are many situations where the woman actually doesn't have the amount of control that she should have. And it's not just rape. Even a properly used condom breaks. Men remove them without telling women (IMO, that's pretty damned close to rape). Birth control fails. I would honestly be ok with limiting abortion after quickening to medical necessity, but ONLY if abortion, sex ed (including how to use contraceptives and about abortion), and contraceptives were easily available everywhere. If states are gonna continue with their bullshit requirements regarding abortions, that's simply a non-starter. Abortion is a health issue for women. For ANY health issue to be under the purview of states' rights is fucking ridiculous. How are contraceptives not easily available??!? You can walk into any drugstore, bodega, convenience store, supermarket, or big box store and walk out with contraceptives. Oh - you mean you want *me the taxpayer* to foot the bill for what is *your* responsibility as an adult? Or you mean that buying contraceptives is embarrassing to you? If you can't handle buying contraceptives, you shouldn't be having intercourse to begin with To be fair, the "right" to contraceptives has the same basis as the "right" to an abortion. If someone were to challenge that right and it came before this Supreme Court, it would likely be overturned and would cease to be easily available in some states. |
|
|
|
Post by libtard on Jun 26, 2022 9:33:47 GMT
How are contraceptives not easily available??!? You can walk into any drugstore, bodega, convenience store, supermarket, or big box store and walk out with contraceptives. Oh - you mean you want *me the taxpayer* to foot the bill for what is *your* responsibility as an adult? Or you mean that buying contraceptives is embarrassing to you? If you can't handle buying contraceptives, you shouldn't be having intercourse to begin with To be fair, the "right" to contraceptives has the same basis as the "right" to an abortion. If someone were to challenge that right and it came before this Supreme Court, it would likely be overturned and would cease to be easily available in some states. And I’m sure there are fundies champing at the bit to deny contraception to people because it violates “the sanctity of marriage” or “God’s plan” or some other bullshit reason. |
|
|
|
Post by kirinke on Jun 26, 2022 12:56:21 GMT
Hell maybe women should just their tubes tied as soon as they can. Oh wait. It's incredibly hard to get that done as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by evileeyore on Jun 27, 2022 14:06:17 GMT
Even Ruth Bader Ginsberg argued that Roe v. Wade was a bad decision and she was for abortion rights. Doctors and procedures get regulated by the way. All of them, so your opinion that the legislators should stay out of it is also wrong. Ginsberg voted for Roe v Wade. She later regretted it and reversed her position solely because of the reasoning laid out in that decision, which was that it was a Right to Privacy issue, rather than making it an Equal Access issue which would have had more staying power in future. And yes, she later felt that it should have been forced before the Congress... to enact an Amendment enshrining it as a Federal Right to Equal Access. If Americans were less devoted to a defunct 250-year old document and more concerned with a dynamic legal system which reflects contemporary values, you would be a happier society. I disagree. We'd be a country full of slaves to the State who had no Rights. You do realize that the majority of Americans are Christian? Right? Things like that should never belong to the state. It's a personal right, therefore a federal matter.
Republicans just lost the midterms with this stunt.
Tell us you don't understand the SCOTUS ruling *nor* the Constitution without telling us you don't understand the SCOTUS ruling *nor* the Constitution... Or politics, or culture, or art, or walking and chewing gum... Western democracies recognize the fact that allowing elective abortions is a social good. Western democracies don't have a vocal contingent of theocratic wannabes and a broken political system which facilitates this kind of bullshit like the US. /spittake Acting like there are no religious fundies in Eurotrash democracies is funny. |
|
|
|
Post by cyphersmith on Jun 27, 2022 15:26:13 GMT
It IS. It is about whether you have the ability to control whether you provide what another life needs. If you're forced to do that, there is most definitely a loss of control of your own body. And before some jackass talks about responsibility prior to pregnancy, fuck off. There are many situations where the woman actually doesn't have the amount of control that she should have. And it's not just rape. Even a properly used condom breaks. Men remove them without telling women (IMO, that's pretty damned close to rape). Birth control fails. I would honestly be ok with limiting abortion after quickening to medical necessity, but ONLY if abortion, sex ed (including how to use contraceptives and about abortion), and contraceptives were easily available everywhere. If states are gonna continue with their bullshit requirements regarding abortions, that's simply a non-starter. Abortion is a health issue for women. For ANY health issue to be under the purview of states' rights is fucking ridiculous. You don't get to dictate to us what it's about. The ONLY thing it's about is stopping the murder of babies. The rest is sophistry on your part to try and reframe things into something you think you can win. It IS a health issue. Period. Pregnancy effects a woman's health. Negatively, in many ways, during pregnancy. And permanently changes her body. |
|
|
|
Post by Maxperson on Jun 27, 2022 16:54:32 GMT
You don't get to dictate to us what it's about. The ONLY thing it's about is stopping the murder of babies. The rest is sophistry on your part to try and reframe things into something you think you can win. It IS a health issue. Period. Pregnancy effects a woman's health. Negatively, in many ways, during pregnancy. And permanently changes her body. No. You also don't get to unilaterally decide what the issue is. Sorry bud. Two sides to this and you don't get to determine that stuff for us. As for health and bodily changes. How do you think abortion affects the health of the baby? Do you think those bodily changes are permanent? I'm going to go with, "Negatively, in many ways" and "Yes." |
|
|
|
Post by cyphersmith on Jun 27, 2022 18:33:16 GMT
It IS a health issue. Period. Pregnancy effects a woman's health. Negatively, in many ways, during pregnancy. And permanently changes her body. No. You also don't get to unilaterally decide what the issue is. Sorry bud. Two sides to this and you don't get to determine that stuff for us. As for health and bodily changes. How do you think abortion affects the health of the baby? Do you think those bodily changes are permanent? I'm going to go with, "Negatively, in many ways" and "Yes." It's still a women's health issue. And I can't think of any other health issue where the government prevents a medical procedure. |
|
|
|
Post by Maxperson on Jun 27, 2022 18:49:42 GMT
No. You also don't get to unilaterally decide what the issue is. Sorry bud. Two sides to this and you don't get to determine that stuff for us. As for health and bodily changes. How do you think abortion affects the health of the baby? Do you think those bodily changes are permanent? I'm going to go with, "Negatively, in many ways" and "Yes." It's still a women's health issue. And I can't think of any other health issue where the government prevents a medical procedure. Sure, but it's not only a women's health issue, and if you believe that life begins at conception, other than life of the mother being at risk, health isn't the most important issue. Not murdering an innocent baby is more important. |
|
|
|
Post by 3catcircus on Jun 27, 2022 19:21:53 GMT
It's still a women's health issue. And I can't think of any other health issue where the government prevents a medical procedure. Sure, but it's not only a women's health issue, and if you believe that life begins at conception, other than life of the mother being at risk, health isn't the most important issue. Not murdering an innocent baby is more important. I could get behind supporting sex education that lefties demand all kids undergo in public schools with no opt-out, as long as it included graphic videos of 2nd and 3rd trimester abortion procedures showing the end result of a "successful" procedure... That might be all it takes to end their rioting over this - that those who are rabidly pro-abortion have no idea of the reality of it. Which is entirely possible, given the left's inability to grasp reality in most every other aspects of life... |
|
