SCOTUS removes Roe V Wade

[Varx]

Give it time...

All good things take time. The civil rights movement, gay marriage, all those great things didn't happen over night. Eventually abortion will be outlawed and many lives will be saved. Hopefully it'll push people to be more responsible when I comes to sex and for parents to properly educate their kids instead of leaving it all for school.

[Jester Joe]

Give it time...

All good things take time. The civil rights movement, gay marriage, all those great things didn't happen over night. Eventually abortion will be outlawed and many lives will be saved. Hopefully it'll push people to be more responsible when I comes to sex and for parents to properly educate their kids instead of leaving it all for school.

I cannot believe you genuinely just tried to compare the 3.

You know, the people pushing for civil rights and gay marriage are the ones supporting abortion being legal, right? You know that gay marriage was pushed so heavily against because of religious reasons, just like abortion is now, right?

Easily the weirdest take I've seen this year.

[jeezusisacasual]

Give it time...

All good things take time. The civil rights movement, gay marriage, all those great things didn't happen over night. Eventually abortion will be outlawed and many lives will be saved. Hopefully it'll push people to be more responsible when I comes to sex and for parents to properly educate their kids instead of leaving it all for school.

Better get to outlawing Condoms, vasectomy, porn or anything else that stands in the way of having children. I just want to get laid but not suffer the problems associated with it like having children, i might be selfish but i want to do what i want to do all the time.

[Varx]

I cannot believe you genuinely just tried to compare the 3.

You know, the people pushing for civil rights and gay marriage are the ones supporting abortion being legal, right? You know that gay marriage was pushed so heavily against because of religious reasons, just like abortion is now, right?

Easily the weirdest take I've seen this year.

I know it might be a bit weird since most ring wingers are religious and are motivated by their religious veiws, but not me. Im agnostic, and I don't need religion to have a good moral compass, which is what this is all about. The immorality about killing babies and finding justification by claiming the earliest stages of dev aren't human.

And btw, the republican party was the party that was against slavery, democrats we're for it.

- - - Updated - - -

Better get to outlawing Condoms, vasectomy, porn or anything else that stands in the way of having children. I just want to get laid but not suffer the problems associated with it like having children, i might be selfish but i want to do what i want to do all the time.

Lol totally against outlawing all of that. Just the unjust killing of babies you know. You don't want them then make sure you dot all your I and cross your t when having sex.

Birth control, condoms, pulling out, morning after pill, spermacide, etc. You do all of that then it's practically guaranteed you won't face an unwanted pregnancy.

And worst case scenario there's adoption.

[cubby]

Give it time...

All good things take time. The civil rights movement, gay marriage, all those great things didn't happen over night. Eventually abortion will be outlawed and many lives will be saved. Hopefully it'll push people to be more responsible when I comes to sex and for parents to properly educate their kids instead of leaving it all for school.

I know both don't know this, and will never understand why, but we have to try. Anti-abortion is an anti-civil rights movement. You'll notice the same people advocating for civil rights and gay marriage are the same people advocating for pro abortion.

Entire wings of library's exist to point out how wrong your entire statement is above, btw.

[Jester Joe]

I know it might be a bit weird since most ring wingers are religious and are motivated by their religious veiws, but not me. Im agnostic, and I don't need religion to have a good moral compass, which is what this is all about. The immorality about killing babies and finding justification by claiming the earliest stages of dev aren't human.

A good moral compass, by forcing people to carry to term a pregnancy no matter the circumstance?

Pretty sure those two are at ends with each other then.

[cubby]

I know it might be a bit weird since most ring wingers are religious and are motivated by their religious veiws, but not me. Im agnostic, and I don't need religion to have a good moral compass, which is what this is all about. The immorality about killing babies and finding justification by claiming the earliest stages of dev aren't human.

So what about when the health of the mother is at stake? For a fetus that would not survive regardless of taking to term?

And btw, the republican party was the party that was against slavery, democrats we're for it.

This is where we see you pushing points of view you were told to think rather than thinking for yourself. No need to continue responding.

[Varx]

I know both don't know this, and will never understand why, but we have to try. Anti-abortion is an anti-civil rights movement. You'll notice the same people advocating for civil rights and gay marriage are the same people advocating for pro abortion.

Entire wings of library's exist to point out how wrong your entire statement is above, btw.

Except that killing babies isn't a human right so it's stupid to compare that to gay and civil rights.

- - - Updated - - -

A good moral compass, by forcing people to carry to term a pregnancy no matter the circumstance?

Pretty sure those two are at ends with each other then.

No, there are exceptions for extreme circumstances. Rape and the life of the mother. otherwise no one is forcing anyone to get pregnant. sooooo...

- - - Updated - - -

So what about when the health of the mother is at stake? For a fetus that would not survive regardless of taking to term?



This is where we see you pushing points of view you were told to think rather than thinking for yourself. No need to continue responding.

^^ refer up.

[gondrin]

I know it might be a bit weird since most ring wingers are religious and are motivated by their religious veiws, but not me. Im agnostic, and I don't need religion to have a good moral compass, which is what this is all about. The immorality about killing babies and finding justification by claiming the earliest stages of dev aren't human.

And btw, the republican party was the party that was against slavery, democrats we're for it.

- - - Updated - - -



Lol totally against outlawing all of that. Just the unjust killing of babies you know. You don't want them then make sure you dot all your I and cross your t when having sex.

Birth control, condoms, pulling out, morning after pill, spermacide, etc. You do all of that then it's practically guaranteed you won't face an unwanted pregnancy.

And worst case scenario there's adoption.

First, you have to prove they are babies to begin with. Babies are humans already born. Prove to me otherwise that a partially grown fetus is a baby. Terms do have meaning.

[Varx]

First, you have to prove they are babies to begin with. Babies are humans already born. Prove to me otherwise that a partially grown fetus is a baby. Terms do have meaning.

Does a human fetus turn into a carrot after 9 months? Lol....

[Jester Joe]

No, there are exceptions for extreme circumstances. Rape and the life of the mother. otherwise no one is forcing anyone to get pregnant. sooooo...

So then what angle are we going with here, that the people who can't afford babies should have to raise them anyway even if it means the child stands no chance, or that they should be put into adoption services that are already struggling to get children adopted?

[Varx]

Pro choice people think that lack of brain activity or w/e means a fetus isn't human.

But a fetus is just a stage of dev of any human. Is a baby less human and undeserving of rights because they can't speak or walk like an adult can? Of course not.

It's all about laziness and not wanting to own up the the consequences of your actions.

- - - Updated - - -

So then what angle are we going with here, that the people who can't afford babies should have to raise them anyway even if it means the child stands no chance, or that they should be put into adoption services that are already struggling to get children adopted?

Um yeah exactly. Does there need to be adoption reform, yeah. Does that justify killing babies, lmao obviously not.

And pretty extreme for you to assume a child stands no chance because of financial standing.

I was raised by a single Hispanic mother and lived in a 10 by 10 studio for 6 months. Literally toilet and shower next to the bed.
But she ain't no quiter and our lives improved over the years

Amazing what hard work and dedication does.

[Jester Joe]

Um yeah exactly. Does there need to be adoption reform, yeah. Does that justify killing babies, lmao obviously not.

And pretty extreme for you to assume a child stands no chance because of financial standing.

I was raised by a single mother and lived in a 10 by 10 studio. Literally toilet and shower next to the bed. Damn did I turn out good.

And how, pray tell, is there supposed to be a adoption reform if the issue is that people don't want to adopt?

Also, I put the statement "Even if" in there for a reason. It's not extreme, it's just a statement.


Oh, and the "holier than thou" nonsense isn't actually bringing anything to the table. You spew out your "ideals" yet seem to have nothing to actually back them up beside vague ideas. So slandering the other side isn't earning you any real credits.

[Varx]

And how, pray tell, is there supposed to be a adoption reform if the issue is that people don't want to adopt?

Also, I put the statement "Even if" in there for a reason. It's not extreme, it's just a statement.


Oh, and the "holier than thou" nonsense isn't actually bringing anything to the table. You spew out your "ideals" yet seem to have nothing to actually back them up beside vague ideas. So slandering the other side isn't earning you any real credits.

Right but because there's a chance they might not make it is excuse to kill them?

And there are many many people who want to adopt.

Hetero couples that can't conceive. Gay couples, etc.

The problem is the adoption process is long and difficult. Especially for the latter.

But again just because the system isn't perfect doesn't justify killing unwanted babies. That type of thinking doesn't help out with revolutions or the rise of great civilizations

- - - Updated - - -

Oh, and the "holier than thou" nonsense isn't actually bringing anything to the table. You spew out your "ideals" yet seem to have nothing to actually back them up beside vague ideas. So slandering the other side isn't earning you any real credits.

What are you talking about. I am giving back. I'm stating the obvious fact that a fetus is a human and has the right to live as anyone else because it's undeniably a human.

Pro life arguments are really simple yet strong because it's the truth. Lefties have to bend over backwards and double think to justify abortion. That's why it seems like I'm not providing anything.

[Nymrohd]

I mean if you deny the right to have control of ones body over the right to life of others I hope you'd agree to, I don't know, everyone being compelled to be an organ donor regardless of personal or religious objections. Including donating organs they can survive without.

[Jester Joe]

Right but because there's a chance they might not make it is excuse to kill them?

And there are many many people who want to adopt.

Hetero couples that can't conceive. Gay couples, etc.

The problem is the adoption process is long and difficult. Especially for the latter.

But again just because the system isn't perfect doesn't justify killing unwanted babies. That type of thinking doesn't help out with revolutions or the rise of great civilizations

Calling it "killing them" is just an attempt to appeal to emotion in this kinda situation. More than enough people have already covered this topic though and since it seems like it falls on deaf ears, there's no point in me trying.

And that isn't exactly falling to "many" when you have to point towards people who are in a minority (some of which are probably going to be next on the chopping block for the right wing).


It's honestly slightly horrifying that you think this is a good situation to be in. So I'll just leave you with a snippet from Penny-Arcade that sums it up better, since you seem to think this is about "morals" and not religion.

I'm shocked; Brenna is not shocked. I grew up in church, in the eighties, and it took them forty years to do it but they did exactly what they said they were going to do. It might be a good idea to listen to them, you know, now, and hear what they want to do next, so we don't go to bed one night and wake up fifty fucking years ago. Again.

https://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2022/06/27/calgon

From under the comic.

[Xyonai]

Pro life arguments are really simple yet strong because it's the truth. Lefties have to bend over backwards and double think to justify abortion. That's why it seems like I'm not providing anything.

Then should people with healthy organs and blood be forced to donate them to people in need? If Yes, then your position is consistent but still abhorrent.

If no, your stance is hypocritical and/or just based on appeals to emotion.

[Varx]

I mean if you deny the right to have control of ones body over the right to life of others I hope you'd agree to, I don't know, everyone being compelled to be an organ donor regardless of personal or religious objections. Including donating organs they can survive without.

This argument is insane....

Pregnancy is completely natural between to individuals who have concented to have sex. Organ donation isn't remotely the same phenomenon.

This is what I'm talking about bending over backwards to create completely insane arguments from the left.

- - - Updated - - -

Calling it "killing them" is just an attempt to appeal to emotion in this kinda situation. More than enough people have already covered this topic though and since it seems like it falls on deaf ears, there's no point in me trying.

And that isn't exactly falling to "many" when you have to point towards people who are in a minority (some of which are probably going to be next on the chopping block for the right wing).


It's honestly slightly horrifying that you think this is a good situation to be in. So I'll just leave you with a snippet from Penny-Arcade that sums it up better, since you seem to think this is about "morals" and not religion.


https://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2022/06/27/calgon

From under the comic.

What else would you call ending the life of a living being if not "killing".

- - - Updated - - -

Then should people with healthy organs and blood be forced to donate them to people in need? If Yes, then your position is consistent but still abhorrent.

If no, your stance is hypocritical and/or just based on appeals to emotion.

Please refer up.

- - - Updated - - -

All pro choice arguments are either completely reachy, like the organ donor one that is not even the same type of situation

Or. Completely arbitrary, like claiming a fetus isn't human due to lack of brain activity. As if a fetus won't ever have brain activity.

Ultimately they're just attempts to justify the horrible act of murder under the flimsy disguise of human rights.

[Nymrohd]

This argument is insane....

Pregnancy is completely natural between to individuals who have concented to have sex. Organ donation isn't remotely the same phenomenon.

This is what I'm talking about bending over backwards to create completely insane arguments from the left.

Then you are failing at comprehension. You espouse morality and one that deals in absolutes so I counter it in deontology which is the most likely approximation to your presumed ethical calculation. Pregnancy requires for the mother to host the fetus without her direct consent and provide it with use of her body to the detriment of her own health. This is not something that is up for debate; it is a basic fact. The main argument against abortion does not even have to do with whether it is a baby or fetus; that is ultimately a secondary argument that calls more on legal concerns. It is that the right to control your own body is ABSOLUTE and thus the right of the pregnant person to control their body is greater than the right of the fetus to assistance for its survival. If we remove this right, if we stop considering it a moral good, the situation I presented that places the right of others to life by means of assistance that is to the detriment of the health of others, which is what pregnancy is, becomes a moral good and you should be accepting it. Or you know, you are a hypocrite.

[Jester Joe]

What else would you call ending the life of a living being if not "killing".

Biology begs to differ.

You keep claiming it has to do with just "brain activity" while you know fully well it's more than that, it's just easier for you to try to argue brain activity.

Also the organ donor thing is pretty on point actually. It's more compelling too actually because organ donors would actually save a life unlike this abortion ban.