SCOTUS removes Roe V Wade

[masterhorus8]

You say that like the infliction of such trauma was not the entire and sole intent of these laws in the first place.

Is it too much wishful thinking that I'd love to see cases like this go to court as inhumane treatment?

[Endus]

Is it too much wishful thinking that I'd love to see cases like this go to court as inhumane treatment?

Frankly, I think an argument could be made for human rights abuses before The Hague.

[Xyonai]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...w-couple-birth

More consequences of Republican extremism on the issue and their actual lack of compassion for pregnant girls and women:



In their rush to control girls and womens bodies, most of these laws are horridly written and these kinds of stories are the result. A woman needing to carry to term, knowing full well the baby she will give birth to will die.

That's basically government-mandated emotional and psychological trauma. Courtesy of the Republican party.

I can't even muster up a snarky or passive-agressive remark about this. That's just horrible and sad, and my heart goes out to the parents for being forced to deal with this bullshit.

[Tentim]

You say that like the infliction of such trauma was not the entire and sole intent of these laws in the first place.

I think it was a response to how casually human life was being treated. I know there isn't a chance you consider life at inception and I'm not arguing abortion should be blanket banned.

If you can't understand your political opponents thoughts you will constantly be taken by surprise and as we seem to be leaning further and further right that will become increasingly dangerous.

Things can change back just as quickly as they changed in your life time.

[Tentim]

It’s not hard to understand the thought pattern of “oppress women”, even if you try to wrap it up in bullshit non-science.

You are free to believe that of course but the world will make a lot more sense if you learn to determine the opposing view rather then assign them some cartoonishly evil motive.

[Calfredd]

You are free to believe that of course but the world will make a lot more sense if you learn to determine the opposing view rather then assign them some cartoonishly evil motive.

You really don't have room to talk.

[Xyonai]

You are free to believe that of course but the world will make a lot more sense if you learn to determine the opposing view rather then assign them some cartoonishly evil motive.

The opposing view is a bunch of nonsense, I'm going to be frank.

'Pro-life' but against any and all things that would make raising a child or, shit, being pregnant even marginally easier on the mother. They're against subsidized school lunches for disadvantaged children, they're against subsidized and affordable medical care, they've put forward no ideas or options for families struggling to raise kids or even feed themselves, they're against comprehensive sex education and contraceptives, and - in this case - they're so anti-science they'll pen and pass bills without either understanding or caring about what the implications of their laws will be.

Like it's all a mess of contrarian nonsense that doesn't look like anything but cartoonishly evil when put into practice.

[Edge-]

You are free to believe that of course but the world will make a lot more sense if you learn to determine the opposing view rather then assign them some cartoonishly evil motive.

See, when you've explained and shown people just how terrible and hurtful and malicious the consequences of their views are and, rather than acknowledge the harm and alter their views to limit it, they double down, it's kinda hard to come to other conclusion than this being something they're consciously (lots of misogynists) or unconsciously (lots of folks who have been raised as a misogynist but don't realize it) doing.

Because if they did actually care, these laws would be very clearly written with no grey area for situations like this to ensure that no girl or woman is suffering needlessly because a bunch of dudes who still can't find the clitoris think they should be legislating girls and womens bodies. Sure they talk up a big game about the sanctity of life and wanting to preserve life, but the consequences of their actions are fairly consistently in opposition with actually achieving said goal.

And then people like you come in and act like we're the unreasonable people for rightfully calling out the malicious harm these conservatives and their views cause. Without a hint of self awareness.

[s_bushido]

You are free to believe that of course but the world will make a lot more sense if you learn to determine the opposing view rather then assign them some cartoonishly evil motive.

That motive hasn't been assigned, it's been inferred from their behavior. They don't give a shit about life. They given even less of a shit about the quality of life.

Cases like this in particular demonstrate exactly why their """beliefs""" are horseshit. People who consider late-term pregnancies do so because of serious medical complications. Not because they're Satanic leftist whores who get a rush out of sleeping around so that they can murder their babies in the womb.

[Endus]

I think it was a response to how casually human life was being treated. I know there isn't a chance you consider life at inception and I'm not arguing abortion should be blanket banned.

"Life at inception" is an intentionally dishonest framing, used to cloud the issue;

1> Life doesn't "begin". Life began (apparently) once, some 3.8 billion years back. Propagation since that event has been a continuation of life, not a beginning; living human beings create living gametes which combine to form a living zygote which develops, eventually, into another human being. There is no point in this loop where anything that was not alive suddenly becomes alive.

2> "Conception" is a completely arbitrary point in that sequence, without much to speak for it being a particularly meaningful stage of the process. Thus, hand-wringing over a fertilized ovum when you wouldn't wring those hands over gametes (sperm and ova) is nonsensical, from a secular point of view.

It's not that I "won't consider" it; it's that I have considered it, and looked at every argument I've seen presented for it, and found all of them intellectually insufficient. They're either irrational, religious, or aesthetic. Each of which make reasonable enough grounds for personal choices, but not for endorsing them at the societal level.

Like, I seriously do not care if you have a religious objection. Feel free to not get an abortion, then; that's entirely your choice, nobody's pushing you to abort. If you try and tell someone else to not abort, though, I'm gonna get pretty pissed at the intentional attack on your target's religious freedoms. Which is what you're engaged in, by definition. Harassment and abuse to try and deny others religious freedom.

If you can't understand your political opponents thoughts you will constantly be taken by surprise and as we seem to be leaning further and further right that will become increasingly dangerous.

You're making allegations that I "don't understand their arguments", and I'd really like to know exactly what I'm getting meaningfully wrong, on any of it.

I've asked that same question over and over and over again in this and other prior threads, and on other forums, and have gotten either bullshit emotional appeals, special pleading on religious grounds, or attempts to shame me for disagreement. Never an actual, justifiable, secular justification. Literally not once, either directly or in the arguments by any group pushing to oppose abortion.

I can change my mind on things like this. I used to be a lot more in favor of the death penalty, for instance. I used to believe capitalist systems could be reformed meaningfully. And then I looked into my preconceptions, examined them against the arguments brought by others, and amended my views where I deemed it appropriate.

And I repeat; with pro-life, I have never seen an argument that, when you poked at it enough, didn't boil down to "I want women as a class to be subjugated to a greater degree" and/or "I want to enforce my petty religious views on non-believers". Feel free to take another shot. Just be ready for me (and others) to return fire.

[unfilteredJW]

You are free to believe that of course but the world will make a lot more sense if you learn to determine the opposing view rather then assign them some cartoonishly evil motive.

Really speed running bad takes on this forum huh?

Hey guys, this guy thinks oppressing women, robbing them of their rights, and forcing births isn't evil.

[Tentim]

Okay, but science nor ethical moral behaviour sides with being against available abortion, from a group of people who are more than happy to let kids starve in school, be food insecure or do nothing to resolve increasing wealth inequality and poverty levels, so the facts don’t actually gel with whatever blissful delusion the pro-abortionists give themselves so they can be evil. That’s just reality friendo.

Few people can really understand big picture problems. Most can only see the most direct and obvious actions. It's a flaw that is extremely difficult to overcome.

- - - Updated - - -

The opposing view is a bunch of nonsense, I'm going to be frank.

'Pro-life' but against any and all things that would make raising a child or, shit, being pregnant even marginally easier on the mother. They're against subsidized school lunches for disadvantaged children, they're against subsidized and affordable medical care, they've put forward no ideas or options for families struggling to raise kids or even feed themselves, they're against comprehensive sex education and contraceptives, and - in this case - they're so anti-science they'll pen and pass bills without either understanding or caring about what the implications of their laws will be.

Like it's all a mess of contrarian nonsense that doesn't look like anything but cartoonishly evil when put into practice.

The people with and against you are not a monolith. Its something to keep in mind.

[Calfredd]

The people with and against you are not a monolith. Its something to keep in mind.

And sometimes a spade is a spade. Something for you to keep in mind.

[Shadowferal]

The people with and against you are not a monolith. Its something to keep in mind.

"Jewish space lasers" comes to mind.

[Tentim]

"Life at inception" is an intentionally dishonest framing, used to cloud the issue;

1> Life doesn't "begin". Life began (apparently) once, some 3.8 billion years back. Propagation since that event has been a continuation of life, not a beginning; living human beings create living gametes which combine to form a living zygote which develops, eventually, into another human being. There is no point in this loop where anything that was not alive suddenly becomes alive.

2> "Conception" is a completely arbitrary point in that sequence, without much to speak for it being a particularly meaningful stage of the process. Thus, hand-wringing over a fertilized ovum when you wouldn't wring those hands over gametes (sperm and ova) is nonsensical, from a secular point of view.

It's not that I "won't consider" it; it's that I have considered it, and looked at every argument I've seen presented for it, and found all of them intellectually insufficient. They're either irrational, religious, or aesthetic. Each of which make reasonable enough grounds for personal choices, but not for endorsing them at the societal level.

Like, I seriously do not care if you have a religious objection. Feel free to not get an abortion, then; that's entirely your choice, nobody's pushing you to abort. If you try and tell someone else to not abort, though, I'm gonna get pretty pissed at the intentional attack on your target's religious freedoms. Which is what you're engaged in, by definition. Harassment and abuse to try and deny others religious freedom.



You're making allegations that I "don't understand their arguments", and I'd really like to know exactly what I'm getting meaningfully wrong, on any of it.

I've asked that same question over and over and over again in this and other prior threads, and on other forums, and have gotten either bullshit emotional appeals, special pleading on religious grounds, or attempts to shame me for disagreement. Never an actual, justifiable, secular justification. Literally not once, either directly or in the arguments by any group pushing to oppose abortion.

I can change my mind on things like this. I used to be a lot more in favor of the death penalty, for instance. I used to believe capitalist systems could be reformed meaningfully. And then I looked into my preconceptions, examined them against the arguments brought by others, and amended my views where I deemed it appropriate.

And I repeat; with pro-life, I have never seen an argument that, when you poked at it enough, didn't boil down to "I want women as a class to be subjugated to a greater degree" and/or "I want to enforce my petty religious views on non-believers". Feel free to take another shot. Just be ready for me (and others) to return fire.

Most believe the fetus is a living person. You can understand your argument but the flaw in that thinking is that you believe defeating their argument matters. Any politician worth their salt will tell you how folly that is.

My layman's take on it is this. They see the fetus as a person ( the fact you and for that matter I don't is irrelevant). Abortion at least in west I can't speak for anywhere else is seen as to... cold and clinical. I think the middle ground here and yes... with the left reeling from the culture shift you are needing to look for the middle ground is to argue abortion as a means of last resort... or rather then argue it find a way to change the public perception to that.

- - - Updated - - -

We see the bigger picture: you want the oppression of women to instil totalitarianism. Don’t be so fucking transparent if you want to act like there’s some deep or convoluted machinations to the evil you wish to see perpetrated.

"You" is a funny word. My ability to see multiple sides to an issue doesn't automatically include me in any group. I support abortion but I'm sure for reasons you would find abhorrent.

- - - Updated - - -

"Jewish space lasers" comes to mind.

I mean... that is akin to say anyone who voted for biden is a mod of r/anti work.

[unfilteredJW]

Most believe the fetus is a living person.

Prove this.

The faux enlightened middle shit is boring.

[Tentim]

The enlightened centrist is the bastion for the lazily ignorant. You’ve also done nothing but bat for misogyny so I am not buying the sudden “I am for abortion” malarky. Very reminiscent non-argument styles that remind me of shit on the road, you know, that dung.

Why am I a centrist ?

[Cthulhu 2020]

There's no argument against abortion that doesn't ultimately end up in either religious baloney or a desire to control women. Even an argument that a fetus has a right to live is ALSO an argument that a woman doesn't have a right to her own body, and must become an incubator for the sake of life. Following that line of thinking, we should start harvesting organs from healthy people to give to those whose lives are in danger because of failing kidneys or livers. After all, if human life is more important than bodily autonomy, that's the obvious conclusion.

[Edge-]

I mean... that is akin to say anyone who voted for biden is a mod of r/anti work.

Eyo, except the lady that believes this shit got reelected.

What does a random reddit sub have to do with that?

[Tentim]

Eyo, except the lady that believes this shit got reelected.

What does a random reddit sub have to do with that?

Just putting out that the most crazy take isn't usually the reason a majority does something