SCOTUS removes Roe V Wade

[Machismo]

I have already discussed this as well.

Being pro choice and pro life, one has to choose between the two at some point. I can see the argument for forced birth, but do not agree with it. One person's right has to be violated, and my opinion right now is in favor of upholding the mother's.

And.. it shows you to either be a complete hypocrite, or an accomplice to murder. I'll note you refuse to admit which it is.

Pick one, or I'll take that as admission it's both.

[Zeth Hawkins]

This isn't a complicated question.

The world would beg to differ. When a person becomes a person does not seem to have a consensus, or measurable exact moment. I take my influence from science, basing it on DNA. No "gotcha" intended with this next question. When does a person become a person for you?

If that's difficult for you to conceive, imagine instead we took a fully-born three-month-old infant, which we all agree is fully a human person and possessing the full rights thereof, and cut a random woman open and put that infant inside her and hooked it up for survival and stitched her back up. Does she not have the right to scream "what the fuck" at you and demand you take that thing out of her? Why doesn't she get a say in this?

She does (or would if this event ever happens) because she did not get a choice in having a person inside her. Again, I have already discussed the rape exception.

- - - Updated - - -

DNA doesn't make someone a person.

A banana has DNA.

What kind of DNA does a banana have? Banana DNA

What kind of DNA does a person have? Human DNA

I look forward to your next reach.

- - - Updated - - -

You can't be anti-abortion and pro-bodily autonomy at the same time. Because until the parasite is viable and can survive on its own, it doesn't have its own rights, and the constitution specifically states that only persons born have rights.

I had thought the "fetuses are parasites" line was a meme. Do people really believe that?

[unfilteredJW]

The world would beg to differ. When a person becomes a person does not seem to have a consensus, or measurable exact moment. I take my influence from science, basing it on DNA. No "gotcha" intended with this next question. When does a person become a person for you?



She does (or would if this event ever happens) because she did not get a choice in having a person inside her. Again, I have already discussed the rape exception.

- - - Updated - - -



What kind of DNA does a banana have? Banana DNA

What kind of DNA does a person have? Human DNA

I look forward to your next reach.

- - - Updated - - -



I had thought the "fetuses are parasites" line was a meme. Do people really believe that?

Yeah, same with people that think a fetus is a person.

Fucking bananas.

[Machismo]

The world would beg to differ. When a person becomes a person does not seem to have a consensus, or measurable exact moment. I take my influence from science, basing it on DNA. No "gotcha" intended with this next question. When does a person become a person for you?



She does (or would if this event ever happens) because she did not get a choice in having a person inside her. Again, I have already discussed the rape exception.

- - - Updated - - -



What kind of DNA does a banana have? Banana DNA

What kind of DNA does a person have? Human DNA

I look forward to your next reach.

- - - Updated - - -



I had thought the "fetuses are parasites" line was a meme. Do people really believe that?

So, sperm and an egg have RNA. I guess you don't know about RNA. Perhaps you should learn some more science.

Considering we have your blatant lies and hypocrisy on record, there's no need to reach.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

I had thought the "fetuses are parasites" line was a meme. Do people really believe that?

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/parasite

Parasite:

an organism living in, on, or with another organism in order to obtain nutrients, grow, or multiply often in a state that directly or indirectly harms the host

[postman1782]

I had thought the "fetuses are parasites" line was a meme. Do people really believe that?

It's a scientific fact. If they can't live without sucking the nutrients out of the mother, then they are nothing but a fucking parasite.

- - - Updated - - -

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/parasite

Exactly. /10char

[Endus]

The world would beg to differ. When a person becomes a person does not seem to have a consensus, or measurable exact moment. I take my influence from science, basing it on DNA. No "gotcha" intended with this next question. When does a person become a person for you?

Birth.

Because personhood is a legal question. It isn't about biology, or faith, or any of that. It's a legal term.

If you want to focus exclusively on science, there isn't a rational dividing point to pick in the developmental scale. And it's a completely irrelevant question, anyway, since the answer has no relevance whatsoever to the question of abortion rights. Which boil down to the very simple question of "is a woman a person, and does she own herself as men do?" Pro-life arguments necessarily limit a woman's equality under the law and treat her as less than fully human.

I can be trivial about the definition of "when does a fetus become a person" because the answer does not matter.

She does (or would if this event ever happens) because she did not get a choice in having a person inside her. Again, I have already discussed the rape exception.

All you're doing is explaining on what grounds you dehumanize women. In this case, it's for making certain "choices".

Also, the "consent" argument here is absolute fucking garbage, because here's a fundamental thing about consent; it can be revoked. If you're mid-coitus, and your partner says "oh god, this is a mistake, get off me", and you say "hey, you made your choice" and keep going, that's called "rape". Even if I acknowledged that consent to sex was consent to pregnancy (it's not), it wouldn't even matter because that consent can be revoked literally any time at the pregnant person's whim.

What kind of DNA does a banana have? Banana DNA

What kind of DNA does a person have? Human DNA

What kind of DNA do my toenail clippings have? Human DNA.

What kind of DNA does a human tumor have? Human DNA.

What kind of DNA does a corpse have? Human DNA.

I could keep going, or have you gotten the message that "has human DNA" is utterly fuckin' meaningless?

I had thought the "fetuses are parasites" line was a meme. Do people really believe that?

The only reason a fetus might not be biologically considered a "parasite" is because it's the same species as the host. That's the only potential separation, and it depends on if we're talking taxonomic categorization or more-general English. While that makes postman1782's position a little hyperbolic, he's more right than wrong, since a fetus fits every other aspect of the definition.

[postman1782]

Birth.

Because personhood is a legal question. It isn't about biology, or faith, or any of that. It's a legal term.

If you want to focus exclusively on science, there isn't a rational dividing point to pick in the developmental scale. And it's a completely irrelevant question, anyway, since the answer has no relevance whatsoever to the question of abortion rights. Which boil down to the very simple question of "is a woman a person, and does she own herself as men do?" Pro-life arguments necessarily limit a woman's equality under the law and treat her as less than fully human.

I can be trivial about the definition of "when does a fetus become a person" because the answer does not matter.



All you're doing is explaining on what grounds you dehumanize women. In this case, it's for making certain "choices".

Also, the "consent" argument here is absolute fucking garbage, because here's a fundamental thing about consent; it can be revoked. If you're mid-coitus, and your partner says "oh god, this is a mistake, get off me", and you say "hey, you made your choice" and keep going, that's called "rape". Even if I acknowledged that consent to sex was consent to pregnancy (it's not), it wouldn't even matter because that consent can be revoked literally any time at the pregnant person's whim.



What kind of DNA do my toenail clippings have? Human DNA.

What kind of DNA does a human tumor have? Human DNA.

What kind of DNA does a corpse have? Human DNA.

I could keep going, or have you gotten the message that "has human DNA" is utterly fuckin' meaningless?



The only reason a fetus might not be biologically considered a "parasite" is because it's the same species as the host. That's the only potential separation, and it depends on if we're talking taxonomic categorization or more-general English. While that makes postman1782's position a little hyperbolic, he's more right than wrong, since a fetus fits every other aspect of the definition.

I am just gonna say, that Evil Midnight Bomber just posted the definition, it doesn't say anything about it requiring another species, it just says another organism.

[Captain N]

I mean even if we consider a fetus a person (it's still not) we cannot force one person donate organs/blood to sustain someone else against their will. That's bodily autonomy. So to claim you're anti-abortion but pro bodily autonomy is nothing more than a lie.

[Endus]

I am just gonna say, that Evil Midnight Bomber just posted the definition, it doesn't say anything about it requiring another species, it just says another organism.

It depends on the particular scientific definition you want to cite, or if you're using a plain-english definition. Only some scientific definitions contain the "different species" requirement, but the idea is that if you don't include that, literally all sexual reproduction is "parasitic", which starts to get silly.

[tehdang]

I had thought the "fetuses are parasites" line was a meme. Do people really believe that?

Memes in political forums are basically par for the course. If it's appeared in a pro-life or pro-choice bumper sticker, it's been mentioned here.

[unfilteredJW]

Memes in political forums are basically par for the course. If it's appeared in a pro-life or pro-choice bumper sticker, it's been mentioned here.

Same goes for others, particular "originalists" on this forum.

[postman1782]

Memes in political forums are basically par for the course. If it's appeared in a pro-life or pro-choice bumper sticker, it's been mentioned here.

It isn't a meme, its actual reality. If it can't survive on its own, its a parasite.

[Xyonai]

I mean even if we consider a fetus a person (it's still not) we cannot force one person donate organs/blood to sustain someone else against their will. That's bodily autonomy. So to claim you're anti-abortion but pro bodily autonomy is nothing more than a lie.

Yeah I was about to chime in with a similar point.

This ring-around about 'When does a person start?' just deliberately side-steps the wider issues of bodily autonomy in the case of the person carrying the fetus to begin with.

Again, should we tap the 'If you support forced births you also support forced blood and organ donations' sign? Or has the ink totally worn off from how much it must've been smudged by now?

[Cthulhu 2020]

There are of course three people involved in an abortion. You know who the third is. (Or four, five, six, etc.)

One stance allows for a life, the other stance disallows life. I am on the former side.

I am pro bodily autonomy. Third time so far, "Every woman should have the choice whether they become pregnant or not."

Not religious, by the way. Atheist. It is a forbidden topic, but I will risk the infraction to mention that. No god(s) exist. The Greek ones a nice to read about though.

You're changing the colloquial usage of terms. This makes your argument inherently dishonest.

Pro-choice means that women can have abortions up to a certain point in their pregnancy for any reason, and can have abortions at any point before birth in circumstances where the birth would threaten their lives, or if it was a rape baby.

But you already know this. You're just intentionally being dishonest. You attempting to rearrange what terms mean does not change what they mean. Nor does it make you pro choice. By your very statements, your position is pro-life, but it's probably more accurate to say it's anti-woman. It's like when people said they were pro-LGBT because they supported conversion therapy. But given everything in this thread, I wouldn't be surprised if you did that too.

Your claims about DNA are also ignorant of science and just demonstrate how grossly uninformed you are. Do some research, and stop trying to change what terms mean.

[MCMLXXXII]

pregnancy diabetes is apperently pretty common. Did she lose it after the pregnancy?

Nope still has it. Has to shoot up every day..

- - - Updated - - -

What kind of DNA do my toenail clippings have? Human DNA.

You murderer. How dare you clip away those nails without them having a say in it?

[Muzjhath]

I literally do not care what incorrect nonsense you've claimed. You're wrong about this, you're wrong about what it means to be "pro-choice", and you're not posting in good faith. My goal here isn't to convince you otherwise, my goal is to point out to everyone how openly dishonest you are about this topic.

On this, IIRC Zeth Hawkins is also a huge transphobe while claiming to be for pride and a supporter of queers etc.

[s_bushido]

"Oh baby get me pregnant!" is probably something a women has never said in the middle of sex. My wife certainly hasn't, and we've been married for 25 years. With LOTS of consensual sex.

It's a pretty common fetish in porn, so maybe those who can't separate fantasy from reality are simply confused...

[Forogil]

So, sperm and an egg have RNA. I guess you don't know about RNA. Perhaps you should learn some more science.

Why are you bringing in RNA?

They have double-stranded DNA as most human cells, and of course some RNA based on that.

[Ripster42]

On this, IIRC Zeth Hawkins is also a huge transphobe while claiming to be for pride and a supporter of queers etc.

That's a cis-pride signature. Basically the "all lives matters" of gender issues.