Right-winger men and men politicians really don't care that much about abortion....

[watsup]

They just use it as a wedge issue for political purposes. That is true--they really don't care about abortion, per se, they just want to have use it as a political hammer to appeal to the evangelical fundie Christians. I would be willing to bet that a good number of men politicians and men chatters on this forum and Republican men elsewhere just use it as another reason to vent their fake outrage, and we would probably be surprised at how many of them even paid for an abortion for a woman of their sexual acquaintance. I'm talking Trump here, for instance.
Fact is that abortion should indeed be up to the woman without the interference of men politicians in the various red states passing more and more extreme anti-abortion bills to see if they can outdo one another. Morally, ethically, they really don't care. It's just all about POLITICAL POWER to them, nothing else.

 

[EdwinWillers]

Fascinating.

Wrong (as usual), but fascinating nevertheless.

 

[watsup]

Fascinating.

Wrong (as usual), but fascinating nevertheless.

Not wrong at all. I don’t believe for a moment that all of those Republican men politicians are adamantly against abortion, per se. It’s all political. They know that they can appeal to the anti-abortion extremist fundie Christians, so they compete with one another to do so. Same with the right wing men chatters in this forum.

 

[Individual]

They just use it as a wedge issue for political purposes. That is true--they really don't care about abortion, per se, they just want to have use it as a political hammer to appeal to the evangelical fundie Christians. I would be willing to bet that a good number of men politicians and men chatters on this forum and Republican men elsewhere just use it as another reason to vent their fake outrage, and we would probably be surprised at how many of them even paid for an abortion for a woman of their sexual acquaintance. I'm talking Trump here, for instance.
Fact is that abortion should indeed be up to the woman without the interference of men politicians in the various red states passing more and more extreme anti-abortion bills to see if they can outdo one another. Morally, ethically, they really don't care. It's just all about POLITICAL POWER to them, nothing else.

Politicians generally use poll results to see which issues would result in the most votes without causing them to lose votes of those who provide the most votes on another issue. Elections are simply a numbers game in a Representative form of Democracy. Big city issues usually dominate the issues, and are mostly spending issues.

 

[EdwinWillers]

Not wrong at all. I don’t believe for a moment that all of those Republican men politicians are adamantly against abortion, per se. It’s all political. They know that they can appeal to the anti-abortion extremist fundie Christians, so they compete with one another to do so. Same with the right wing men chatters in this forum.

We already know full well your opinions on the subject so starting yet another thread to regurgitate them without even so much as an articulated point for why you're sharing them with us - yet again - is just so much spam.

Your intent is painfully obvious, which isn't to propound or generate any new information so as to further some discussion or debate, but instead to throw out more emotional bile, pandering to your other friends here who are into the same puerile games as you, that of bashing Republicans, conservatives, and Christians - or anyone remotely right of you who hold differing opinions / beliefs than yours.

Tell me I'm wrong - articulate the point of this thread. Articulate it as being something other than the involuntary spewing of your opinion for the purpose outlined above.

 

[watsup]

We already know full well your opinions on the subject so starting yet another thread to regurgitate them without even so much as an articulated point for why you're sharing them with us - yet again - is just so much spam.

Your intent is painfully obvious, which isn't to propound or generate any new information so as to further some discussion or debate, but instead to throw out more emotional bile, pandering to your other friends here who are into the same puerile games as you, that of bashing Republicans, conservatives, and Christians - or anyone remotely right of you who hold differing opinions / beliefs than yours.

Tell me I'm wrong - articulate the point of this thread. Articulate it as being something other than the involuntary spewing of your opinion for the purpose outlined above.

Ad hom.

 

[HIP56948]

I actual changed a guy's mind about the abortion thing. He and I were slightly arguing points about the subject and being aware of his background I
told him a story. (Not mine) Something like: "You know, Dave..you play around a lot but keep this in mind" What if one night you do the sex-thing and afterward, you really
don't care for the women, personality wise" In 2 months or so she wants an abortion and you protest it. You talk her into having the child. Keep in mind this one thing. Are you happy with paying for the child for many years and be aware that your finances are going down the toilet, and that new car or whatever is never going to happen and some women
would not touch you with the proverbial 10 foot pole. The reason I'm yakking about this is I knew that scenario from a young man once. (True happening)
You might want to rethink your position on women's rights....and there's DNA tests nowadays".
I could almost see the lights go on in his brain. He didn't say anything but a few days later he seem to be way much softer about the issue.
It's true that for some people, greed and inconvenience can trump one's so-called morals.

 

[EdwinWillers]

Ad hom.

smh

"Ad hom??" This thread is an ad hom towards anyone on your right.

Articulate your point for the thread. Please.

I'll help you start:

"The purpose of this thread is to demonstrate how abortion is political wedge issue for those on the right."
"This thread's purpose is to demonstrate how abortion is just a vehicle in which they can vent their faux outrage - faux because they really don't care; faux because they've all paid for abortions themselves for their women."
"The purpose of this thread is to demonstrate how morally and ethically they do not care, how this is just an issue giving them more political power."
"This thread's purpose is to demonstrate how abortion should be up to the woman, not politicians."
"The purpose of this thread is to demonstrate how abortion is just a political hammer to appeal to evangelical, fundamentalist Christians."

Here's my point: I see at least five different potential purposes for this thread. The fact that you've only opined on each of them, articulated none of them (as your point) while providing ZERO evidence for any of them, but instead lumped them all together into a single whine-fest in the OP is proof there's no actual point for this thread beyond the point I asserted it is a few posts back.

And that, my friend, is not an ad-hominem. It's a fact.

 

[watsup]

"The purpose of this thread is to demonstrate how abortion is political wedge issue for those on the right."
"This thread's purpose is to demonstrate how abortion is just a vehicle in which they can vent their faux outrage - faux because they really don't care; faux because they've all paid for abortions themselves for their women."
"The purpose of this thread is to demonstrate how morally and ethically they do not care, how this is just an issue giving them more political power."
"This thread's purpose is to demonstrate how abortion should be up to the woman, not politicians."
"The purpose of this thread is to demonstrate how abortion is just a political hammer to appeal to evangelical, fundamentalist Christians."

So which of these do you disagree with and why?

 

[Loulit01]

Politicians will not pass anti-abortion laws that affect them or their loved ones. They know they can affordto travel to states where abortion is legal. These anti-abortion laws affect only women too poor to travel for an abortion. It's very easy to rant about abortion and pass laws against it when you know those laws have no impact on you.

Texas didn't pass a law against abortion. Texas passed a law against poor women getting abortions. The rest will simply travel. It's sick, really.

In 1964 LBJ declared war on poverty.
Today's neo-conservatives have declared war on the poor.

 

[EdwinWillers]

So which of these do you disagree with and why?

All of them - first, because they're just opinions and second, because you haven't demonstrated - or provided warrant for why I should alter my beliefs to agree with any of them.

 

[watsup]

All of them - first, because they're just opinions and second, because you haven't demonstrated - or provided warrant for why I should alter my beliefs to agree with any of them.

What are your beliefs?

 

[EdwinWillers]

What are your beliefs?

Geez... here we go, down the rabbit hole.

Articulate a point; provide some warrant for why we should believe it, and then get back to me. We'll see if your warrant holds water or not.

 

[watsup]

Geez... here we go, down the rabbit hole.

Articulate a point; provide some warrant for why we should believe it, and then get back to me. We'll see if your warrant holds water or not.

So let me get this straight. According to you, I have to “articulate points”, but when is ask you to do so, you don’t. Seems like a double-standard to me.
See post #12.

 

[Goshin]

One of the worst things you can do in debate, is to begin from the broad-brush assumption that NO ONE in the opposition is sincere about their position.

Broad-brush assumptions are usually wrong.

Now I'd agree that a good many Republican politicians don't really care about abortion except as a wedge issue. However, I think the vast majority of pro-life activists (many of whom are women, btw) are in fact sincere, believe that abortion ends a human life, and that it is a tragedy and an offense against humanity.

I feel confident in this assertion, because I'm sure I know a lot more of them than you do, and they are very sincere.

Mischaracterising the nature of the issue doesn't help anyone.

 

[Indlib]

All of them - first, because they're just opinions and second, because you haven't demonstrated - or provided warrant for why I should alter my beliefs to agree with any of them.

Abortion is a constitutional right.

That's not opinion

 

[Goshin]

Abortion is a constitutional right.

That's not opinion

Actually it is opinion. The opinion of a previous Supreme Court, but always highly controversial.

The Constitution does not specifically mention abortion. The SCOTUS opinion that made it a constitutional right was based on an *implied* right to medical privacy.

That remains controversial and there is some chance it could be overturned.

I'm not advocating a position, btw, just correcting an error. SCOTUS decisions are not easily changed but they're not necessarily eternal either.

 

[Indlib]

Actually it is opinion. The opinion of a previous Supreme Court, but always highly controversial.

Yeah. That is how SCOTUS decisions work

The Constitution does not specifically mention abortion. The SCOTUS opinion that made it a constitutional right was based on an *implied* right to medical privacy.

Yeah. Neither does it mention presumption of a innocence or the right travel. 9th amendment and unenumerated rights and all. Thank goodness for James Madison.

That remains controversial and there is some chance it could be overturned.

Yep, good point. Just like the Heller decision.

It could be overturned.

I'm not advocating a position, btw, just correcting an error. SCOTUS decisions are not easily changed but they're not necessarily eternal either.

What was my error?

 

[Goshin]

What was my error?

Using Frank Burns as an avatar, for starters.

 

[Mustachio]

They just use it as a wedge issue for political purposes. That is true--they really don't care about abortion, per se, they just want to have use it as a political hammer to appeal to the evangelical fundie Christians. I would be willing to bet that a good number of men politicians and men chatters on this forum and Republican men elsewhere just use it as another reason to vent their fake outrage, and we would probably be surprised at how many of them even paid for an abortion for a woman of their sexual acquaintance. I'm talking Trump here, for instance.
Fact is that abortion should indeed be up to the woman without the interference of men politicians in the various red states passing more and more extreme anti-abortion bills to see if they can outdo one another. Morally, ethically, they really don't care. It's just all about POLITICAL POWER to them, nothing else.

You can refer back to my thread, but yes, the majority of self described Republicans believe abortion should remain legal at least in some instances. I think in the first trimester, maybe 1/2 and then for health, assault, etc.

I think 10% of Americans want abortion to be illegal. I'd check my own thread but why, when YOU can?!

🤭

 

[Indlib]

Using Frank Burns as an avatar, for starters.

Lol. Well I did hear he is a pretty nice guy outside of MASH.

You must prefer Emerson Winchester the third? 😀

 

[Goshin]

Lol. Well I did hear he is a pretty nice guy outside of MASH.

You must prefer Emerson Winchester the third? 😀

Yeah I've heard that too, though I never met him.

I did find Winchester more entertaining.

 

[Dayton3]

They just use it as a wedge issue for political purposes. That is true--they really don't care about abortion, per se, they just want to have use it as a political hammer to appeal to the evangelical fundie Christians. I would be willing to bet that a good number of men politicians and men chatters on this forum and Republican men elsewhere just use it as another reason to vent their fake outrage, and we would probably be surprised at how many of them even paid for an abortion for a woman of their sexual acquaintance. I'm talking Trump here, for instance.

I'm as against abortion as anyone here and I've never paid for an abortion. For that matter no woman I know has to my knowledge ever gotten an abortion. So though you are "willing to bet" you are in fact..wrong.

 

[EdwinWillers]

So let me get this straight. According to you, I have to “articulate points”, but when is ask you to do so, you don’t. Seems like a double-standard to me.
See post #12.

My point has always been obvious and straightforward - that you articulate yours (this being a "debate" site, after all); because let me rephrase it: if you can't articulate your point - you don't have one.
And apparently, given your dodging and reticence to respond, you really don't have one.

Broad-brushed generalities are 1) generally always wrong - being broad-brushed and general, and 2) are really nothing more than unsupported opinions, without warrant whatsoever

1. "Right winger men [really] don't care about abortion" - not true. I care about it. I actually care about it a lot. (generality blown)
2. "...and politicians [don't care about abortion].... just use it as a wedge issue for political purposes" - isn't the purpose of "wedge issues" to divide? Wouldn't a politician (being a politician) want to do just the opposite? (logic blown)
3. "they just want to use it as a political hammer to appeal to evangelical fundie Christians" - probably some truth to this; but would you have us believe all politicians are doing this? (generality blown)
4. "[men politicians, chatterers, and Republican men elsewhere] just use it as another reason to vent their fake outrage..." - Let me get this straight - "we" (lumping myself in with men politicians, chatterers here and Republicans elsewhere) have a bunch of fake outrage for which we need reasons to vent it? And abortion is just one of those reasons? "Fake outrage" for what? What does that even mean? (generality with cryptic reference blown)
5. "we would probably be surprised at how many of them even paid for an abortion for a woman of their sexual acquaintance." - Well, since we're just guessing - how many would you guess that would be? (Supposition blown)
6. "I'm talking Trump here, for instance." (TDS blown)
7. "Fact is that abortion should indeed be up to the woman..." "Fact is?" This is an opinion, not a fact. ("fact" blown). And why just the woman? You just got through supposing surprise at the number of men involved. If it's only up to the woman, how are the men involved? (logic blown)
8. "...without the interference of men politicians in the various red states passing more and more extreme anti-abortion bills to see if they can outdo one another." - It's your position that politicians in red states are seeing if they can outdo one another in passing ever more extreme anti-abortion bills? (absurd straw-man logic blown)
9. "Morally, ethically, they really don't care. It's just all about POLITICAL POWER to them, nothing else." Abortion is all about political power, no morals involved, no ethics? What about the one-up-manship in #8 above? Are you really that cynical to believe this of all "right winger men?" (generality blown)

It's clear you have some strong opinions about abortion and "right winger men" - but that's all they are - your opinions. And in blasting that group as you did in such a broad-brushed and general manner, it's likely a pellet or two hit its target somewhere in the group, but you've no warrant for grouping us all together in the first place, let alone making the assertions you've made in your OP, none at all.

 

[Gateman_Wen]

Fascinating.

Wrong (as usual), but fascinating nevertheless.

tRump: "Pro life? I can be pro life. What's pro life?"