1. #6541
    High Overlord
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    180
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    We don't have a demilitarized zone to interrogate and ridicule the basest forms of propaganda and hysterical disinformation like you brought up here. First topic People of Praise and ACB, then we'll move on to how Ketanji Brown Jackson can't figure out what a woman is, how the murder of Christians by a transgender person means trans people are the real victims, or Joe Biden erasing his seventh grandchild in every nod to his grandchildren. This is all grist to the lowest culture warrior's mill. I see and acknowledge the people that bathe in that stuff, but unless you can summon literally Matt Walsh here to form your debating equal, you're out of luck. Those conversations are pointless.
    Please then, in your own words, provide the definition of a woman. No copying and pasting, just what you, the person(?) behind the @tehdang account believes it to be.

  2. #6542
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    Those conversations are pointless.
    Well, at least you acknowledge that all you're going to do is fling around propagandists' feces while refusing to stand behind that shit when called out on it. I think that's progress.

  3. #6543
    The Lightbringer
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    3,071
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    We don't have a demilitarized zone to interrogate and ridicule the basest forms of propaganda and hysterical disinformation like you brought up here. First topic People of Praise and ACB, then we'll move on to how Ketanji Brown Jackson can't figure out what a woman is, how the murder of Christians by a transgender person means trans people are the real victims, or Joe Biden erasing his seventh grandchild in every nod to his grandchildren. This is all grist to the lowest culture warrior's mill. I see and acknowledge the people that bathe in that stuff, but unless you can summon literally Matt Walsh here to form your debating equal, you're out of luck. Those conversations are pointless.
    Matt Walsh, the guy who wants to impregnate 16 year old children?
    - Lars

  4. #6544
    Quote Originally Posted by Muzjhath View Post
    Matt Walsh, the guy who wants to impregnate 16 year old children?
    "He didn't say he wanted to impregnate 16 year-olds! He just said that that's the best time to do it, and that it's a shame that culture has moved to the point where marrying that young is frowned upon!"

    -Justifications I've heard from people desperate to defend that slime.

  5. #6545
    The Lightbringer tehdang's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    3,188
    Quote Originally Posted by Cthulhu 2020 View Post
    You've been wrong everywhere on this forum, every time. Your crying about people having abortions right before birth for funsies was a hilariously bad talking point that you aired out the day after Cucker Carlson mentioned it.

    Also, Matt Walsh "debating equal" good joke. Walsh being a self-proclaimed fascist has a massive following on the right. OAN and Newsmax are gaining viewership among the right, and Fox is being labeled as "too far left" because they fired Cucker Carlson. You wave your hand away at everyone pointing out how extreme and violent the right is getting, meanwhile the facts work against you every time.
    Democrats have refused to endorse any restrictions on late term abortions for some time now. I'm not going to apologize for noticing that.

    Quote Originally Posted by s_bushido View Post
    Well, at least you acknowledge that all you're going to do is fling around propagandists' feces while refusing to stand behind that shit when called out on it. I think that's progress.
    The mods have rules on religion, sexuality, gender, and gender identity, and I haven't seen a carve-out for "unless someone's being called out on it, then it's all hunky dory."

    Quote Originally Posted by Muzjhath View Post
    Matt Walsh, the guy who wants to impregnate 16 year old children?
    If you want a debate on religious small groups and why one might have historically called members "handmaids," you're gonna want a debating equal. Someone that loves diving into that kind of stuff and using sarcasm and innuendo in the way used here. I picked the first name that came to mind, but there's others.

    Quote Originally Posted by UnifiedDivide View Post
    Damn, you really do amount to nothing but those noisy right-wing loons you see on Twitter, huh?

    Genuinely curious where everyone goes as a collective for these talking points.
    Is it so hard to handle the gutter-level culture warrior stuff that I'm grouping with "handmaids" and ACB? Fair's fair if you want to go "literally a handmaid," prepare for "literally doesn't know what a woman is." I don't think either can be profitably examined here, and both risk transgressing posted rules. I don't think there's actually an appetite to have right-wing loons and left-wing loons arguing over their political trash, which is mostly used to preach to the choir.
    "I wish it need not have happened in my time." "So do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."

  6. #6546
    matt walsh the guy who says democracy was a mistake and identifies as a theocratic fascist, thats the 1st name that springs to mind for you?

  7. #6547
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    Democrats have refused to endorse any restrictions on late term abortions for some time now. I'm not going to apologize for noticing that.
    Because its a stupid talking point. Late term abortions are very rare and only happen in when there is risk to the mother or some other complication. No one does a late term abortion just because they've changed their mind and don't want a child anymore.

  8. #6548
    Titan Captain N's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    New Resident of Emerald City
    Posts
    11,332
    Watching this guy flail about on "late-term abortions" as some kind of reason to continue to let women suffer or carry dead fetuses to term is beyond barbaric. This is the sort of women-hating incel behavior that seems to run rampant in the extremists camp.
    “You're not to be so blind with patriotism that you can't face reality. Wrong is wrong, no matter who does it or says it.”― Malcolm X

    I watch them fight and die in the name of freedom. They speak of liberty and justice, but for whom? -Ratonhnhaké:ton (Connor Kenway)

  9. #6549
    The Lightbringer
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Look behind you.
    Posts
    3,776
    Quote Originally Posted by Captain N View Post
    Watching this guy flail about on "late-term abortions" as some kind of reason to continue to let women suffer or carry dead fetuses to term is beyond barbaric. This is the sort of women-hating incel behavior that seems to run rampant in the extremists camp.
    It also just goes to show how bunk the talking point is. If 'Late term abortions' were all Republicans were worried about, they would be pushing legislation targeting the late second to third trimester instead of banning it outright. No, this half-assed compromise is just an excuse to give Conservatives a solid foot in the door so they can keep pushing back on it later, now with a minimum 'reasonable' baseline to work with.

    (Edit) In fact, I add that while Late-term abortions are 'rare', I can also add that - from the headlines we keep seeing over and over and over again - they're statistically common enough because of sudden late-term complications that keeping them protected is in our best interest. For every make-believe whoever that decides that they're gonna just change their mind a sprint away from the finish line, there's at least ten women who need these procedures or else they'll fucking die / suffer long term medical complications / can't ever have kids again.

    And, as a human being with functioning empathy and critical thinking skills; The rare cases of hypothetical later term voluntary abortion are worth it if very real women with very real problems can get the help they need.
    Last edited by Xyonai; 2023-05-07 at 04:57 PM.

  10. #6550
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    81,918
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    Democrats have refused to endorse any restrictions on late term abortions for some time now. I'm not going to apologize for noticing that.
    Why should they? It's an attack on women's self-ownership, and the only basis for the denial of those rights is religious mores, which means it's also an attack on people's religious freedoms.

    If you have a religious objection to abortion because of religious concepts like life beginning at conception or whatnot, that's fine. Make your own choices accordingly. That's where your rights stop. You don't get to push those views on other people.

    Is it so hard to handle the gutter-level culture warrior stuff that I'm grouping with "handmaids" and ACB? Fair's fair if you want to go "literally a handmaid," prepare for "literally doesn't know what a woman is." I don't think either can be profitably examined here, and both risk transgressing posted rules. I don't think there's actually an appetite to have right-wing loons and left-wing loons arguing over their political trash, which is mostly used to preach to the choir.
    At least you're just openly being transphobic at this pojnt and have given up pretending to be a reasonable, empathic person. Having to dig through the layers of lies to get to the hatemongering you're actually trying to sneak in gets exhausting.


  11. #6551
    Bet you 10 bucks @tehdang can't give a definition for "woman" we can't pick apart in 20 seconds.
    “There you stand, the good man doing nothing. And while evil triumphs, and your rigid pacifism crumbles to blood stained dust, the only victory afforded to you is that you stuck true to your guns.”

  12. #6552
    Quote Originally Posted by Xyonai View Post
    It also just goes to show how bunk the talking point is. If 'Late term abortions' were all Republicans were worried about, they would be pushing legislation targeting the late second to third trimester instead of banning it outright. No, this half-assed compromise is just an excuse to give Conservatives a solid foot in the door so they can keep pushing back on it later, now with a minimum 'reasonable' baseline to work with.

    (Edit) In fact, I add that while Late-term abortions are 'rare', I can also add that - from the headlines we keep seeing over and over and over again - they're statistically common enough because of sudden late-term complications that keeping them protected is in our best interest. For every make-believe whoever that decides that they're gonna just change their mind a sprint away from the finish line, there's at least ten women who need these procedures or else they'll fucking die / suffer long term medical complications / can't ever have kids again.

    And, as a human being with functioning empathy and critical thinking skills; The rare cases of hypothetical later term voluntary abortion are worth it if very real women with very real problems can get the help they need.
    To put it in numerical terms late term abortion are less than 2% of abortions because no one would do that unless it was a medical necessity. You've carried the baby for 6 months names and everything is already picked out.

  13. #6553
    The Lightbringer tehdang's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    3,188
    Quote Originally Posted by SoulForge View Post
    Because its a stupid talking point. Late term abortions are very rare and only happen in when there is risk to the mother or some other complication. No one does a late term abortion just because they've changed their mind and don't want a child anymore.
    It's a fatal concession on your part. How are you supposed to argue against 6-week or 12-week abortion bans, if your own position is legal throughout the pregnancy? It is your position on legality, as much as you want to declare it impossible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain N View Post
    Watching this guy flail about on "late-term abortions" as some kind of reason to continue to let women suffer or carry dead fetuses to term is beyond barbaric. This is the sort of women-hating incel behavior that seems to run rampant in the extremists camp.
    People want to call me bad-faith, but look how insolently you transmute "late-term abortions" to "dead fetuses." I'm sure you're capable of debating the pro-life position, but you opt for an easier straw man.

    Quote Originally Posted by Xyonai View Post
    I add that while Late-term abortions are 'rare', I can also add that - from the headlines we keep seeing over and over and over again - they're statistically common enough because of sudden late-term complications that keeping them protected is in our best interest.
    So they might remain protected for the most severe complications, like those threatening the life of the mother and the life of the baby. But the hidden secret is the only protection you don't want extended is to the life of the baby absent such conditions. Protections only go one way for you. That sort of matters when you have to convince Americans that protections ought to only go one way.

    The best way to de-fang the 6-week abortion bans is to advocate for severe restrictions for post-viable unborn baby abortions. The best way to ensure they last longer and take longer for legislative repeal is to support no restrictions whatsoever prior to delivery.

    Quote Originally Posted by Chonogo View Post
    And to inject more reality into this, if a woman did decide at the last minute to abort(never happens), the doctor would refuse to perform the abortion.
    People are spending a lot of time and energy arguing the doctor has the legal right to perform the abortion in this case. I would have thought less passion would be evoked by banning a thing that never happens, but even that is a bridge too far for the pro-aborts. I am slowly becoming convinced that several here would prefer 6-week and 8-week bans to stay as the law for one or two years longer, with all the societal ills from it that they proclaim, than to verbally advocate for 20-22 week or post-viability general bans with exceptions (etc) to change the law sooner in their direction.

    Sure, it would only impact the 1%, but apparently no law must touch it and that's final. It sounds a little extreme to me, but I have been reading and digesting this forum's earnest comments on the issue.
    "I wish it need not have happened in my time." "So do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."

  14. #6554
    Titan Captain N's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    New Resident of Emerald City
    Posts
    11,332
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    People want to call me bad-faith, but look how insolently you transmute "late-term abortions" to "dead fetuses." I'm sure you're capable of debating the pro-life position, but you opt for an easier straw man.
    Because your arguments are bad-faith and come from a place of fiction. Late term abortions are a rarity and you've been shown this time and time again and continue to troll the forum with nonsense. A dead fetus is something that happens when there's problems in its development and instead of being able to have it removed because of Republican legislation, a woman is forced to carry it to term, and give birth to a corpse. You know this though, and are just doing this shit for attention -- you're not the first nor will you be the last.
    “You're not to be so blind with patriotism that you can't face reality. Wrong is wrong, no matter who does it or says it.”― Malcolm X

    I watch them fight and die in the name of freedom. They speak of liberty and justice, but for whom? -Ratonhnhaké:ton (Connor Kenway)

  15. #6555
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    sip
    "Late term abortions" are a 100% made up imaginary strawman problem. It's a non existent problem. It was perfectly regulated under Roe v Wade.

  16. #6556
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    It's a fatal concession on your part. How are you supposed to argue against 6-week or 12-week abortion bans, if your own position is legal throughout the pregnancy? It is your position on legality, as much as you want to declare it impossible.
    What a stupid argument. People are literally suffering, and some nearly dying, because doctors are waiting on legal to give them advice in each case they come across so they don't go to prison. I'll argue against any bans because its none of my business if a woman wants to get an abortion. That is be between her and her doctor. Which is where it should stay.

    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    People are spending a lot of time and energy arguing the doctor has the legal right to perform the abortion in this case. I would have thought less passion would be evoked by banning a thing that never happens, but even that is a bridge too far for the pro-aborts.
    Strike one. No such thing as pro-abortion. Its pro-choice.
    Strike two. If it doesn't happen then why are you banning it? The only thing you do is cause confusion when someone requires it due to a complication and people suffer for it. But that is the point isn't it? Causing suffering. That seems to be the point of a lot of republican legislation recently. I can't think of anything they've done to help people in decades.
    Last edited by SoulForge; 2023-05-07 at 10:31 PM.

  17. #6557
    The Lightbringer tehdang's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    3,188
    Quote Originally Posted by Captain N View Post
    Because your arguments are bad-faith and come from a place of fiction. Late term abortions are a rarity and you've been shown this time and time again and continue to troll the forum with nonsense. A dead fetus is something that happens when there's problems in its development and instead of being able to have it removed because of Republican legislation, a woman is forced to carry it to term, and give birth to a corpse. You know this though, and are just doing this shit for attention -- you're not the first nor will you be the last.
    If you want to debate somebody that demands an already-dead unborn baby must be carried to term, look elsewhere. This is just a strawman you're very committed to, and the strength of your commitment doesn't make it a part of somebody else's ideology.

    Quote Originally Posted by Elder Millennial View Post
    "Late term abortions" are a 100% made up imaginary strawman problem. It's a non existent problem. It was perfectly regulated under Roe v Wade.
    Consider just for a second that nobody here said they support a return to how Roe vs Wade treated late-term abortions (well, more like how it allowed states to prohibit except under circumstances).

    You may become the first person to state that you wish post-viability abortions to be generally illegal. I see no way to reconcile "it was perfectly regulated under Roe v Wade" and "I don't want it to be illegal because I choose to believe they're only done for causes I agree with." States could and did, and existing law can and does.

    Quote Originally Posted by SoulForge View Post
    What a stupid argument. People are literally suffering, and some nearly dying, because doctors are waiting on legal to give them advice in each case they come across so they don't go to prison. I'll argue against any bans because its none of my business if a woman wants to get an abortion. That is be between her and her doctor. Which is where it should stay.
    Then you're arguing against Roe, since it explicitly permitted states to declare them generally illegal with an exemption.

    Maybe your view is that every state that did so was unjust for the last 50 years. Certainly you can believe post-Roe post-viability regulations were a problem, and then it's no wonder that you think today's regulations are a problem.

    Strike one. No such thing as pro-abortion. Its pro-choice.
    Strike two. If it doesn't happen then why are you banning it? The only thing you do is cause confusion when someone requires it due to a complication and people suffer for it. But that is the point isn't it? Causing suffering. That seems to be the point of a lot of republican legislation recently. I can't think of anything they've done to help people in decades.
    People have afforded themselves the privilege of declaring the pro-life position is not actually pro-life. Therefore, as a reminder to the logic of this, I have chosen to sometimes call the pro-choice side as pro-aborts. Certainly I've seen ample evidence of people here favoring legal abortion throughout every week of the pregnancy, so the epithet has some descriptive power.

    I believe the true weighing of the mother's burden and the fully capable child she is bearing means giving protections to the baby post-viability, period. If this wasn't a human, and wasn't mere inches from deserving full protections, and abortion wasn't incredibly fatal to the child, then I'd be closer to seeing things your way. I gather mothers killing their own babies after birth is also vanishingly small, so can you declare them nonexistent and thus ought not to be protected by laws? I don't see the logic in always deciding the only two parties in the three-party system are Doctor and Mother when we both know the unborn child in late-stage pregnancy is fully capable of existing without the mother. How about protecting the rare cases, and I consider maternal infanticide also a rare case if you're actually concerned about the principles here, instead of declaring them impossible?

    I don't think you're ever going to prove the negative "It doesn't ever happen." Every late-term pregnancy abortion in every single case for the entirety of history has to always fit your preconceived ideas of what constitutes an acceptable reason to abort. Maybe you already consider "withdrawal of bf/gf support" to be an acceptable reason for a late-term abortion, but saying it never happens is concealing the real reasons you think it should happen.
    "I wish it need not have happened in my time." "So do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."

  18. #6558
    The Lightbringer
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Look behind you.
    Posts
    3,776
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    So they might remain protected for the most severe complications, like those threatening the life of the mother and the life of the baby. But the hidden secret is the only protection you don't want extended is to the life of the baby absent such conditions. Protections only go one way for you. That sort of matters when you have to convince Americans that protections ought to only go one way.
    Except none of the people pushing abortion bans actually want to put those exemptions into law, or make the laws so poorly worded that doctors can't perform these procedures until the very moment the mother's life is in danger which an often be too late. And in that case either of our opinions on the well-being of the fetus doesn't really matter, because in this instances the kid's doomed either because it's going to be born dead or kill its mother before they can be born.

    And, as mentioned before, a viable fetus isn't going to be aborted. No real, actual person in this thread is arguing that a mother has the right to terminate a viable late-term pregnancy, what we're arguing is that the lack of regulations is there so that when these procedures need to be done to save the mother's life, then they can be done without having to wade through horribly worded or utterly inflexible laws.

  19. #6559
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    Democrats have refused to endorse any restrictions on late term abortions for some time now. I'm not going to apologize for noticing that.

    The mods have rules on religion, sexuality, gender, and gender identity, and I haven't seen a carve-out for "unless someone's being called out on it, then it's all hunky dory."

    If you want a debate on religious small groups and why one might have historically called members "handmaids," you're gonna want a debating equal. Someone that loves diving into that kind of stuff and using sarcasm and innuendo in the way used here. I picked the first name that came to mind, but there's others.

    Is it so hard to handle the gutter-level culture warrior stuff that I'm grouping with "handmaids" and ACB? Fair's fair if you want to go "literally a handmaid," prepare for "literally doesn't know what a woman is." I don't think either can be profitably examined here, and both risk transgressing posted rules. I don't think there's actually an appetite to have right-wing loons and left-wing loons arguing over their political trash, which is mostly used to preach to the choir.
    Late term abortions don't happen unless it is for a stillbirth or the health of the mother. Literally nothing happens after 24 weeks. So stop fucking lying.

  20. #6560
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    81,918
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    It's a fatal concession on your part. How are you supposed to argue against 6-week or 12-week abortion bans, if your own position is legal throughout the pregnancy?
    If your position is that abortion should always be legal, why would that suddenly change when confronted with an arbitrary week limit?

    Stop pushing Christian-fascist bullshit and attacking other people's freedom of (from) religion.

    People want to call me bad-faith, but look how insolently you transmute "late-term abortions" to "dead fetuses." I'm sure you're capable of debating the pro-life position, but you opt for an easier straw man.
    There are literally ongoing cases in the USA where women whose fetuses have literally died are unable to have those fetuses removed because doing so involves an abortion and their State has banned abortions, so they're waiting for the fetus to go septic which will give enough cause to act.

    https://people.com/health/beauty-you...n-on-abortion/
    https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/16/healt...sis/index.html

    This isn't hypotheticals, we're talking about actual events. There is no "trasmutation", you just either literally do not understand the discussion or, more likely, are willfully lying about it out of your deep-seated animosity.

    There really isn't any "debate" to be had with the pro-life position. The pro-life position is an inherently religious and misogynist one, and the only "debate" it deserves is the response of "fuck no, keep that to yourselves".

    I spent years on these forums asking in good faith for anyone to give me any secular defense for pro-life stances. Never got a single valid response. Because there isn't one. It's religious fascism and misogyny, and nothing more.


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •