I want to live in an even more overpopulated world so the world is depleted of it's resources even faster than it already is. BAN ABORTION!
I want to live in an even more overpopulated world so the world is depleted of it's resources even faster than it already is. BAN ABORTION!
*Wooooosh* right over your head.
Why am I not surprised?
If we are talking about who should be calling the shots, a fully-grown woman or a loose collection of cells, I'd say probably the fully-grown woman.
I trust a women who is capable of reproduction to make the right decision for her own body, without anyone telling her what she should or shouldn't do, or can or can't do. That is because I believe women are intelligent enough to make decisions about their own body.
I am aware that conservatives feel differently about women and their intelligence, however.
There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that “my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge." - Isaac Asimov
In my mind a fetus becomes a person the instant the mother makes the (reversible) decision that she is going to carry it to birth. It wouldn't be covered legally until it meets whatever laws the region has covering it (obviously), but for the sake of what to call it I'm more than happy to call it a human being the instant it is fertilized. It doesn't make one difference in the abortion debate to me.
Asking is fine, but that isn't what happens, it is demanded and legislated. This takes away the mothers right to her own body and requires her (at some point depending on where she lives) to act as an incubator for another human. We don't force this kind of requirement on anyone else anywhere in society where their bodies become are subject to the whim of another (we do have other laws that I do various degrees disagree with but generally speaking its your body and yours to do with as you see fit up until the point you start encroaching no another's right to theirs). When it is demanded that the mother host the child and forced upon her as best as it can be that is giving the control of her body over to another human.
The issue is that when you let conservatives have their way with labels, they tend to legislate based on those labels. They deal in purposeful obtuseness, base pedantry and willed ignorance.
What it really comes down to is this: If you believe that banning abortions and shuttering reproductive services makes either women or fetuses any safer, you are living in a fantasy world constructed entirely out of your own ignorance and hate.
History has shown time and time again that conservatives have a lot of experience there.
There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that “my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge." - Isaac Asimov
You're asserting (not necissicarily incorrectly) their position when you do that. There are all kinds of bad reasons to be against abortions and there are some not so bad ones (I would still classify them as bad personally, I have yet to hear a compelling reason). If you start off labeling them and asserting how they are going to act and why they act a particular way you're not going to learn anything, someone may actually have a good point to be made that might change your view, but if you come off with this labelling right off the bat you'll never get there. Now, after trying to get them answer a question a few times and they keep dancing around or keep refusing to answer stuff, well any real discussion is off the table so go nuts at that point imo
I have, unfortunately, interacted with Randec on these forums before. I know what to expect from him.
There are no good reasons to be against optional abortions. None. As I said in the post you quoted, if you believe that banning abortions and shuttering reproductive services makes either women or fetuses any safer, you are living in a fantasy world constructed entirely out of your own ignorance and hate. This is what conservatives believe. This is what they attempt to legislate.
What you don't seem to understand is that conservatives like Randec have already labelled themselves with their bigoted, anti-humanist agenda.
Also, I don't think they need anyone to defend their ignorance. They can handle that all on their own.
Last edited by Espe; 2014-04-16 at 02:10 AM.
There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that “my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge." - Isaac Asimov
Different people whom you can put under some kind of general category can still believe different things about various subjects. Saying someone's x and because of that he believe y isn't a useful way to talk to others. Just because he happens to believe something on another topic (and maybe it was on this some subject, I have no idea) that doesn't mean he's going to fall into the stereotype of that camp on this topic. So far he hasn't said anything beyond the normal, he hasn't been as vile about his beliefs, I definitely disagree with them and can back up why, I'm waiting on his response before I even consider passing my personal judgement on his beliefs. You are of course free to do otherwise, but I don't know why you'd bother engaging him at all then.
Even if you could find me a self-identifying pro-choice conservative I would question why that person considers themselves to be so. Besides that, there are always exceptions to the rule, even a broken clock is right twice a day, etc.
I think it is vile to put anti-science ideology ahead of the health and rights of women. I think it is vile to put such ignorance into law. You, of course, might think it is perfectly acceptable.
Shaming racists, misogynists and homophobes for what they are is one of many ways to effect social change. You are free to take your own approach, even if that means white-knighting for bigots and helping them feel justified in their ignorance.
There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that “my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge." - Isaac Asimov
Honestly nothing she stated hasn't been posted across the internet. Bad arguments for a personal opinion.
The sanctity of life is not a valid reason to disallow abortion. Life is not sacred, certainly not in a legal sense. If we actually applied these juvenile ideas about life, that it is in fact a sacred thing, our entire society would have to fundamentally changed. All poverty would be mandated to be removed by any means necessary, as all life is sacred there must be equality in terms of the amenities given to each sacred life. We clearly already acknowledge that life is not a sacred existence, but a naturalistic one, based on naturalistic principles. The strong survive, but the mammalian aspects of humans means we still care for each other by the creation of social support structures. So why treat the initial stages of unconscious life as being so sacred, to disregard unimaginable suffering after birth? It's the common callous nature of the conservative views in regards to abortion, live babies to become miserable wretches which are discounted by society.
She had one mildly applicable point, abortion at 5 months. This is a joke by any rational approach, unless the foetus endangers the life of the mother she should carry it to term. If it takes you 5 months to decide, you're not to be trusted with the responsibility to do so.
Oh and she's coached, don't even fool yourself. Her parents are so "proud" of her words, because they most likely badgered her with them time and again.
At twelve I had my first kiss and didn't know what a vagina was, can kids not be left some level of childhood? Fucking hell.
Oh and twelve year old children from middle America aren't entitled to an opinion on something most people spend their early adulthood forming their opinion on. Little princess hasn't ever seen a drug addicted infant crying for crack. When my mind goes to dementia, I'm being euthanized. I'd like to think I'd not have been born a crack addict as well.
A person can be conservative about some things and not about others, using it as a blanket insult (same with lib-tard and whatever other clever names people have come up with describe the two ends of the spectrum) just makes you sound like you're not interesting in any kind of conversation about anything and just want to push an ideology instead of specific ideas.
I would agree that's wrong, so far I haven't heard that argument used, but yes, anti-science is a terrible thing to put ahead of the health and rights of women (or, well, anyone).
I don't think you're going to have any real success on a forum trying to shame someone who openly admits to some of these anti-choice beliefs, at best you might get some details out when having a real discussion that people who are on the fence might read and help sway them. But hey, whatever floats your boat.
To me conservative is an insult. Ask yourself "What issues unite conservatives to use the term themselves." If you answer honestly, you will understand why I find the term and the people who consider themselves such insulting.
You have either not been paying attention, did not even skim through the other posts in this thread alone, or are just being a contrarian at this point.
You don't understand how publicly shaming ignorant beliefs can effect change? I can't even figure out a way to explain it in simpler terms. It has been an effective strategy for effecting social change throughout history.
I see, so you believe that you should have a "real discussion" with racists, misogynists and homophobes, and you don't see how this in any way gives credibility to their ignorant positions - positions which conservatives are fond of turning into law.
Right back atcha.
- - - Updated - - -
Well said. One thing to add, though: No one, and I mean no one, is aborting a child at five months unless there is a medical necessity. There doesn't need to be laws put into place that prevent doctors from helping women who do have serious medical issues.
Last edited by Espe; 2014-04-16 at 03:30 AM.
There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that “my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge." - Isaac Asimov
Happened where? Is there a link to the full story from a credible news source?
Regardless, it doesn't excuse these parents for using their daughter for their own bigoted agenda. It also doesn't explain how taking away abortion and reproductive health services makes women or fetuses any safer.
There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that “my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge." - Isaac Asimov
In my opinion, I think what it all comes down to is: The woman existed first, so her rights come first. Even if you're going to consider the fetus a "human being with rights," why does its rights suddenly trump the woman's? Rights are trumped and trounced by others all the time because it's kind of like mass. Only one object can occupy any given space at a time. Only one set of rights can apply at a time in this kind of situation. Is it that the woman has lived long enough, whatever that means, and new is always better than old?
I know I might be acting stupid and provocative, but I'm wondering about some of the arguments that would be made against this.
Also, I understand the desire to publicly shame people, but it's really not going to get to them unless it somehow happened on a very grand scale. More specifically, it would have to happen within just their own world. For example, if they lived on Facebook or some world like that and a large majority of their family members and friends suddenly started talking against the person's views, then it might finally get to him/her.
It's more stimulating, and at least more entertaining, to at the very least pretend to argue with them to see their side. Your side could, and probably is, just as mystifying to them as their side is to us.
Last edited by Senka; 2014-04-16 at 03:55 AM.
My point is, I have no problem calling a fig a fig, or a trough a trough. Conservatism is what it is - the people it attracts are who they are. The one common thread that unites them is their anti-humanist agenda. Whether they hate the poor, the sick, the elderly, women, homosexuals or whoever the minority of the moment is, for whatever reason (usually "because religion"), and hide behind whatever mask - they are united by their ignorance and their hate.
There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that “my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge." - Isaac Asimov
How about you stop stereotyping people who label themselves as conservatives, and have a discussion based on facts.
Moms and dads should do everything they can to care for their child developing inside of the mom, as well as outside of her too.
I am a conservative, and I do not hate anyone period, nor am I trying to secretly hide any hate either.
Last edited by Belisarius565; 2014-04-16 at 04:00 AM.
My goal is not to change the mind of the people I call out directly. For example, I don't think I will change Randec's mind about anything, he is clearly going to stick with whatever ignorant beliefs he has been conditioned to accept as truth. However, if enough people speak plainly about finding those ignorant beliefs and the laws based on them reprehensible, it will effect social change.
There were plenty of people during the civil rights movement who didn't consider themselves to be racist but didn't see how protesting would make any difference. They just wanted to go with the status quo and make as few waves as possible, mostly because it didn't effect them directly. Is that the side of history you would rather be on?
Maybe for you. Certainly not for everyone. I personally don't see what depth their ignorance can possibly hold.
You're right, it must be hard for the average conservative to wrap their head around basic human empathy. About as hard as it is for me to give their ignorance credibility by assuming it has merit enough to be debated - even if just to play devil's advocate.
- - - Updated - - -
So it happens, but there is no proof that is is happening, but that means we should be writing anti-abortion laws and restricting women's rights because of an anecdote from some person on a random internet forum.
Got it.
- - - Updated - - -
Tell me, conservative, what is the legislative agenda of the politicians you vote for?
Life should always be fair, and perfect, and no one should ever get sick, and no one should ever be abused, and everyone should always do the right thing.
It's a shame that's not how life works. Most people understand this simple concept when they mature out of childhood and give up their stunted fantasies.
Once again, conservative, what is the legislative agenda of the politicians you vote for? What do the politicians you support and elect into office actually attempt to put into law?
There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that “my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge." - Isaac Asimov