I’m Pro-Choice: Change My Mind Without Calling Me A Baby Killer

[Lursa]

Seems we have a differing definition of "criticize" too.

Hey, you can address me without addressing the question all you want...it's obviously a diversion.

If you dont want to explain the use of 'innocence' as pro-lifers use it, no surprise. It's meaningless and emotionally manipulative.

 

[Media_Truth]

So: I do not subscribe to any moral values placed on fetuses. I do not place any societal value to a fetus (or I should say outside of the respective person(s) intimately involved with a given fetus. Clearly they value and cherish, to which I certainly say bless!). I do not buy into the arbirtrary nature of “heartbeats” and “brainwaves.” We end human life - actual real on the planet persons - every day via any number of decisions based on factors other than “heartbeats and brain waves.”

I do not care when “life” begins, as I have stated - a fetus has no intrinsic value to a society outside of what the carriers of that fetus wish it to have.

So where does this leave us? Why should I ever agree to allow anyone control or say in my own body? What is the justification for this massive intrusion into my privacy when anyone threatens to ban abortion?

Regarding rights, if you rewind to 1973, 7 of the 9 supreme court justices voted for Roe/Wade. Six of those justices were appointed by Republicans. One justice, stated that "we don't file a death certificate when there is a miscarriage". So LEGALLY, they stated that the fetus does NOT have rights. That said, I believe that minimally, an abortion deprives a living being of future happiness, which I believe to be immoral. However, I don't look for political solutions to abortion. I view it as a spiritual matter. If a woman has a spiritual awakening, she will probably not choose abortion. If one seeks political solutions to abortion, they are asking for MORE LAWS. I think additional laws will be near impossible to enforce, and they will require a lot of government bureaucracy to attempt enforcement.

 

[Atreus21]

Someone that doesn't understand the difference between the enslavement of a living human being and the abortion of a non-sentient, unaware 1st trimester fetus isn't smart enough to have an intelligent opinion about either slavery or abortion.

She said some lives aren't important. Nazis and slavery said the same thing, and I'd like to know why she disagrees with them.

 

[weaver2]

........That said, I believe that minimally, an abortion deprives a living being of future happiness, which I believe to be immoral.

Being born is not a guarantee of happiness. There are fetuses that will be born so malformed they are institutionalized for life and that life will be constant chaos and pain. There are some that will be born into deep poverty with a 90% chance of ending up homeless or incarcerated. There are others born into dysfunctional families that will be sexually or physically or mentally abused. Shouldn't a woman have the right to abort and prevent these situations. In my mind it is immoral to birth a child into a situation that will destroy it.

However, I don't look for political solutions to abortion. I view it as a spiritual matter. If a woman has a spiritual awakening, she will probably not choose abortion. If one seeks political solutions to abortion, they are asking for MORE LAWS. I think additional laws will be near impossible to enforce, and they will require a lot of government bureaucracy to attempt enforcement.

Leaving abortion to a "spiritual l awakening" is just asking for religious interference in private personal decisions that only the family can make. Conservative "Christians" are right now figuring out way to intrude on individual freedom to make personal decisions about private reproductive issues in their families.

Religion is always for more control of the individual and more laws to enact that control.

 

[weaver2]

She said some lives aren't important. Nazis and slavery said the same thing, and I'd like to know why she disagrees with them.

Can you not read? Antifa has not disagreed with anything you've said and she did not say that some lives aren't important. What she said was, "Fetus aren’t people. I believe a fetus is a life. Just not an important one."
Antifa neither agreed or disagreed with your post. She ignored it because it's a dumb question. Slave owners do not deal with fetuses and Nazi eugenics experiments didn't involve abortions for family reasons. Why the anti-abortion movements loves to use this Nazi/slave owner argument is strange. It doesn't lead to any conclusion other than the proponent of the argument is too stupid to know the difference between an enslaved human being and a fetus.

 

[Media_Truth]

Being born is not a guarantee of happiness. There are fetuses that will be born so malformed they are institutionalized for life and that life will be constant chaos and pain. There are some that will be born into deep poverty with a 90% chance of ending up homeless or incarcerated. There are others born into dysfunctional families that will be sexually or physically or mentally abused. Shouldn't a woman have the right to abort and prevent these situations. In my mind it is immoral to birth a child into a situation that will destroy it.

It is my opinion that it is immoral to deprive a living being of future happiness. Nobody can predict the future. Yes, I am saying that women should have that choice in this country. I believe it's a spiritual and introspective decision that each woman has to make.

Leaving abortion to a "spiritual l awakening" is just asking for religious interference in private personal decisions that only the family can make. Conservative "Christians" are right now figuring out way to intrude on individual freedom to make personal decisions about private reproductive issues in their families.

Religion is always for more control of the individual and more laws to enact that control.

I am not implying forcing any religion on any person. I'm saying that abortion laws and cramming legislation down the throats of women are not the answer. Being a spiritual person, I am merely saying that if a woman has a spiritual awakening (Christian or other), she will probably not choose abortion. In that light, if religious people really want to reduce abortion numbers, they should try unify with other people, not alienate them.

 

[weaver2]

It is my opinion that it is immoral to deprive a living being of future happiness. Nobody can predict the future. Yes, I am saying that women should have that choice in this country. I believe it's a spiritual and introspective decision that each woman has to make. I am not implying forcing any religion on any person. I'm saying that abortion laws and cramming legislation down the throats of women are not the answer. Being a spiritual person, I am merely saying that if a woman has a spiritual awakening (Christian or other), she will probably not choose abortion. In that light, if religious people really want to reduce abortion numbers, they should try unify with other people, not alienate them.

Roe v Wade says women are free to make what ever decision is best for them. That includes not getting an abortion. Right now the only people doing any cramming of abortion laws are the anti-abortion people.

 

[Waddy]

So: I do not subscribe to any moral values placed on fetuses. I do not place any societal value to a fetus (or I should say outside of the respective person(s) intimately involved with a given fetus. Clearly they value and cherish, to which I certainly say bless!). I do not buy into the arbirtrary nature of “heartbeats” and “brainwaves.” We end human life - actual real on the planet persons - every day via any number of decisions based on factors other than “heartbeats and brain waves.”

I do not care when “life” begins, as I have stated - a fetus has no intrinsic value to a society outside of what the carriers of that fetus wish it to have.

So where does this leave us? Why should I ever agree to allow anyone control or say in my own body? What is the justification for this massive intrusion into my privacy when anyone threatens to ban abortion?

I totally agree. And carry that sentiment to it's logical end. There are many people alive right now that aren't worth the air they breath. The death penalty is a wonderful idea. It should be applied more widely. As Michael Moore preaches, only reducing the human population can save this planet. But I ain't volunteering. You all go first, then I'll follow, I promise.

 

[Aunt Antifa]

I totally agree. And carry that sentiment to it's logical end. There are many people alive right now that aren't worth the air they breath. The death penalty is a wonderful idea. It should be applied more widely. As Michael Moore preaches, only reducing the human population can save this planet. But I ain't volunteering. You all go first, then I'll follow, I promise.

No idea what any of this means.

 

[Waddy]

No idea what any of this means.

you're a good example........

 

[Aunt Antifa]

you're a good example........

A good example of what?

 

[Waddy]

A good example of what?

exactly........ I rest my case.

 

[Aunt Antifa]

exactly........ I rest my case.

Oh..okay.

Thanks for stopping by all the same.

 

[Waddy]

Oh..okay.

Thanks for stopping by all the same.

my pleasure. The laughs were worth it.

 

[Aunt Antifa]

my pleasure. The laughs were worth it.

I don’t pay for bandwidth here, so I guess you showed me.

 

[Waddy]

I don’t pay for bandwidth here, so I guess you showed me.

I guess it's true you get what you pay for.

 

[Aunt Antifa]

I guess it's true you get what you pay for.

Agreed!

 

[Phys251]

If I want to read about male astrology, I’ll look up libertarianism.

Thus far your posts in this thread have consisted of personal attacks, claims of your own arguments emanating your asshole, and a troll attempt by name dropping someone you think is gonna make me soooo mad.

I guess this is the “science” yall swear you follow on this issue. Shrug.

That is the exact same tactic that the transphobes use.

 

[Aunt Antifa]

That is the exact same tactic that the transphobes use.

When your entire ego and ideological drive is to try to make other adults mad, this is the flotsom we wade through.

 

[Phys251]

When your entire ego and ideological drive is to try to make other adults mad, this is the flotsom we wade through.

And to control the genitals of anyone who isn't a heteronormative male. Prolifers never stop and think about how ****ing creepy their beliefs are.

 

[Aunt Antifa]

And to control the genitals of anyone who isn't a heteronormative male. Prolifers never stop and think about how ****ing creepy their beliefs are.

The obsession with trans folks is all tied to one fact: cis men are terrified they might accidentally find someone attractive that their friends will think is gay.

 

[Phys251]

The obsession with trans folks is all tied to one fact: cis men are terrified they might accidentally find someone attractive that their friends will think is gay.

That and a LOT of heteronorms, particularly heteronormative men, belive that penis-in-vagina sex is the only kind.

It never ceases to fascinate me how the Venn diagram of the people who believe that, the anti-choicers, the opponents of affordable and easily-available birth control, and the opponents of comprehensive sex ed, is one big circle.

 

[Waddy]

That and a LOT of heteronorms, particularly heteronormative men, belive that penis-in-vagina sex is the only kind.

It never ceases to fascinate me how the Venn diagram of the people who believe that, the anti-choicers, the opponents of affordable and easily-available birth control, and the opponents of comprehensive sex ed, is one big circle.

Where do you get these ideas? You're hanging out with some strange people. I'm a straight white guy and I insist on some sort of birth control. And I like that there's plenty of places to poke my dick besides just the vagina. And I think abortion should be legal even after birth, until the age of 18, say. For some it should be mandatory. And I like sex education, because I want a woman who knows what she's doing. Breaking in newbies is a chore. I never understood Islam's notion of 72 virgins being a reward. Sounds like a lot of work to me.

 

[Ouroboros]

It is my opinion that it is immoral to deprive a living being of future happiness. Nobody can predict the future. Yes, I am saying that women should have that choice in this country. I believe it's a spiritual and introspective decision that each woman has to make.


I am not implying forcing any religion on any person. I'm saying that abortion laws and cramming legislation down the throats of women are not the answer. Being a spiritual person, I am merely saying that if a woman has a spiritual awakening (Christian or other), she will probably not choose abortion. In that light, if religious people really want to reduce abortion numbers, they should try unify with other people, not alienate them.

I think it’s significant, though, that when you spoke of spiritual choice, Weaver2 jumped to the idea of religious groups coercing such decisions. While such coercion is possible, those who advocate for more legal solutions are also applying forms of coercion— if not necessarily on pregnant women, then on religious organizations being obliged to underwrite abortions. Both sides of the political question involve coercion in some form, though I appreciate that you don’t take such a position.

 

[weaver2]

I think it’s significant, though, that when you spoke of spiritual choice, Weaver2 jumped to the idea of religious groups coercing such decisions. While such coercion is possible, those who advocate for more legal solutions are also applying forms of coercion— if not necessarily on pregnant women, then on religious organizations being obliged to underwrite abortions. Both sides of the political question involve coercion in some form, though I appreciate that you don’t take such a position.

Conservative anti-abortion religiouns are not being coerced into having nor are they paying for legal abortion. It is a legal medical procedure as is hip surgery. If conservative religious organizations can create a dogma around women and abortion then claim their religious freedom allows them to abolish abortion's legality what comes next: creating a dogma that prohibits contraceptives ............. oh....... wait that ship's already sailed.

When your mission statements read like these evangelical statements religious law becomes public law.

“Evangelicals believe that government is a gift from God for the common good. Good governance creates the conditions in which human beings fulfill their responsibilities as God’s image bearers and as stewards of God’s creation.” (Mission statement of the National Association of Evangelicals)

"Focus on the Family affirms the importance of social responsibility, supporting government institutions and protecting them against destructive social influences. God has ordained all social institutions, including the government, for the benefit of mankind and as a reflection of His divine nature. The Supreme Court's imposition of the doctrine of separation of church and state distorts the Founding Father's recognition of our unequivocally Christian nation and the protection of religious freedom for all faiths." (“Focus on the Family”position statement on Church and State)

According to the Biblical Christian worldview, human government was instituted by God to protect our unalienable rights from our own selfish tendencies. (Statement on the role of government from:All About GOD Ministries, Inc)

It is up to Christians to “restore once again to America a biblically based legal system that protects all human life from conception to natural death,” (Cultural Impact Team Resource Manuel)

Both sides of the political question do not involve coercion in some form. One side only is using their religious freedom to bludgeon all women into carrying every pregnancy to term.

Abortion is a 1st Amendment issue.