|
Post by novastar6 on Jul 11, 2023 5:20:01 GMT
"SHE will be ALIVE when you go to sleep."
So they're acknowledging the baby is alive AND a person and they're just going to kill it anyway, "She will have PASSED".
And oh yeah they NEVER do late term abortions unless the mother's gonna die, they NEVER do them for any other reason, sure, it's ALWAYS a medical life or death emergency.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jul 11, 2023 19:09:18 GMT
Having a baby is the naturally foreseeable outcome of having unprotected sex. Having a baby is more the foreseeable outcome of not being allowed a choice to abort. Surely you don't think they haven't? Again an irrelevance to the fact that rights have been removed from a huge number of women. You seem to be implying that many women in the event don't mind the loss of their reproductive right enough to make it noteworthy, when this is clearly not true (and a majority of the population do, in fact mind, a lot, either as women or as men who care about women's rights. But no one is suggesting that women do not regret their abortions, for many undoubtedly it will be a sad, hurtful and sorrowful decision so, yes, your long selection of clips is ... a strawman. But it was their CHOICE and it would be easy to find other regretful women who never the less still felt it was the right decision. Perhaps we can have some women now who have been forced to carry to full term and now face lack of career progression, increased poverty, health issues and mental illness? Please quote where I employ hysterical hyperbole, like running off at the keyboard perhaps in a long, mostly unpunctuated rant? As for facts, it is a fact that millions of women have lost valued and hard fought-for rights at the behest of a religious minority and that as the figures I have given show it is a unpopular retrograde step. If you need any more information and facts just let me know. I am sorry though but I don't use social media as a news source. ... And this is just victim blaming. As ought to be obvious, there are plenty of things in life one might regret doing in the event but that is no reason to deny people choice in their lives particularly at the behest of a religious conservative lobby. Your repeated efforts to paint withdrawing reproductive rights and control over their own bodies for women as being the best way to protect them from themselves is disingenuous and ultimately patronising. But as (one presumes) a traditionalist Christian male something hardly surprising.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jul 11, 2023 19:20:13 GMT
"SHE will be ALIVE when you go to sleep." So they're acknowledging the baby is alive AND a person and they're just going to kill it anyway, "She will have PASSED". And oh yeah they NEVER do late term abortions unless the mother's gonna die, they NEVER do them for any other reason, sure, it's ALWAYS a medical life or death emergency. Youtube is not an authoritative news source. And yet it is all you appear to use and appear to value its weight and authority. Would you like me to link to pro abortionists or some instructive atheist videos from there?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 11, 2023 19:45:25 GMT
It strikes me that the far right fundos so vehemently anti abortion in the US are the same people that support the death penalty, cheer migrants dying at the border, love guns, support wars, and think that poor people should not get welfare or healthcare and just be allowed to die in poverty.
Hypocrisy is the greatest luxury... It's sickening how you have twisted Christianity to serve your own personal material greed.
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on Jul 11, 2023 23:28:02 GMT
It strikes me that the far right fundos so vehemently anti abortion in the US are the same people that support the death penalty, cheer migrants dying at the border, love guns, support wars, and think that poor people should not get welfare or healthcare and just be allowed to die in poverty. Hypocrisy is the greatest luxury... It's sickening how you have twisted Christianity to serve your own personal material greed.
So how many rapists and murderers on death row are you planning to adopt? You know, since you're against killing them, you damn well better be willing to take them in and provide for them, otherwise you're just a hypocrite.
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on Jul 11, 2023 23:29:35 GMT
Having a baby is the naturally foreseeable outcome of having unprotected sex. Having a baby is more the foreseeable outcome of not being allowed a choice to abort. Surely you don't think they haven't? Again an irrelevance to the fact that rights have been removed from a huge number of women. You seem to be implying that many women in the event don't mind the loss of their reproductive right enough to make it noteworthy, when this is clearly not true (and a majority of the population do, in fact mind, a lot, either as women or as men who care about women's rights. But no one is suggesting that women do not regret their abortions, for many undoubtedly it will be a sad, hurtful and sorrowful decision so, yes, your long selection of clips is ... a strawman. But it was their CHOICE and it would be easy to find other regretful women who never the less still felt it was the right decision. Perhaps we can have some women now who have been forced to carry to full term and now face lack of career progression, increased poverty, health issues and mental illness? Please quote where I employ hysterical hyperbole, like running off at the keyboard perhaps in a long, mostly unpunctuated rant? As for facts, it is a fact that millions of women have lost valued and hard fought-for rights at the behest of a religious minority and that as the figures I have given show it is a unpopular retrograde step. If you need any more information and facts just let me know. I am sorry though but I don't use social media as a news source. ... And this is just victim blaming. As ought to be obvious, there are plenty of things in life one might regret doing in the event but that is no reason to deny people choice in their lives particularly at the behest of a religious conservative lobby. Your repeated efforts to paint withdrawing reproductive rights and control over their own bodies for women as being the best way to protect them from themselves is disingenuous and ultimately patronising. But as (one presumes) a traditionalist Christian male something hardly surprising.
"Murder is wrong, murder for convenience is especially wrong" is not exclusively a Christian belief, even millions of scientific atheists believe it. They also believe it applies to unborn babies because the SCIENCE says it's human, it's alive, and it can feel pain.
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on Jul 11, 2023 23:30:33 GMT
"SHE will be ALIVE when you go to sleep." So they're acknowledging the baby is alive AND a person and they're just going to kill it anyway, "She will have PASSED". And oh yeah they NEVER do late term abortions unless the mother's gonna die, they NEVER do them for any other reason, sure, it's ALWAYS a medical life or death emergency. Youtube is not an authoritative news source. And yet it is all you appear to use and appear to value its weight and authority. Would you like me to link to pro abortionists or some instructive atheist videos from there?
Would you care to explain why so many who had abortions became pro-life? Why some abortionists walked away from their profession and became pro-life?
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jul 12, 2023 9:51:31 GMT
Youtube is not an authoritative news source. And yet it is all you appear to use and appear to value its weight and authority. Would you like me to link to pro abortionists or some instructive atheist videos from there?
Would you care to explain why so many who had abortions became pro-life? Why some abortionists walked away from their profession and became pro-life?
Would you care to explain why this is enough to deny women control over their own bodies and reproductive rights? For instance it is easy to find examples of those who, for various reasons, sometime strong ones including damaged lives, left religious cults or the wider church. Does than mean religion ought to be banned?
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jul 12, 2023 10:01:54 GMT
"Murder is wrong, murder for convenience is especially wrong" is not exclusively a Christian belief, even millions of scientific atheists believe it. They also believe it applies to unborn babies because the SCIENCE says it's human, it's alive, and it can feel pain. Many in the medical community believe there’s clear evidence that a fetus – a developing baby in the womb – can’t feel physical pain until after the 24th week (6th month) of pregnancy. But other scientists say it’s possible for a fetus to feel pain as early as 12 weeks (3 months) into its development. Today, the position of many major medical organizations, including the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM), and the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG), is that a fetus isn’t capable of feeling pain until at least 24-25 weeks. Given that forty-three percent of all abortions occur in the first six weeks of pregnancy, and 92 percent in the first 13 weeks, (and were generally illegal in the later stages, even before the overturning of Roe vs Wade) this is just another straw man from you, I am afraid. www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/12/14/upshot/who-gets-abortions-in-america.htmlwww.webmd.com/baby/when-can-a-fetus-feel-pain-in-the-wombAnd once again: justified killing of which we have plenty of examples in the Bible by way of instruction, is not seen as murder. Murder is unlawful killing. Otherwise, for instance, state executioners or soldiers would be on trial for murder each time they work. I hope that helps. But it didn't last time.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jul 12, 2023 10:08:31 GMT
It strikes me that the far right fundos so vehemently anti abortion in the US are the same people that support the death penalty, cheer migrants dying at the border, love guns, support wars, and think that poor people should not get welfare or healthcare and just be allowed to die in poverty. Hypocrisy is the greatest luxury... It's sickening how you have twisted Christianity to serve your own personal material greed.
So how many rapists and murderers on death row are you planning to adopt? You know, since you're against killing them, you damn well better be willing to take them in and provide for them, otherwise you're just a hypocrite.
But you ought to be against the state killing them too, since you are against "murder" right?
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on Jul 12, 2023 17:36:59 GMT
Would you care to explain why so many who had abortions became pro-life? Why some abortionists walked away from their profession and became pro-life?
Would you care to explain why this is enough to deny women control over their own bodies and reproductive rights? For instance it is easy to find examples of those who, for various reasons, sometime strong ones including damaged lives, left religious cults or the wider church. Does than mean religion ought to be banned?
Doublethink: "To believe in lies while knowing they're false."
If women have no control over their bodies or reproductive rights without abortion, that means not only every pregnancy in the world, but every single sexual encounter with a woman, has always been rape, because they had no CONTROL over that, meaning they couldn't say yes or no, they never initiated, they weren't asked, every single last one of them was always forced to have sex against their will. Meaning every man who ever had sex with a woman is a rapist, and every single time a man *ever* had sex with a woman, it was always rape.
It also means infertile women have absolutely NO control over their bodies since they can't ever get pregnant so they can't ever get an abortion.
And really, since we want to pretend abortion is a medical procedure and pregnancy is a disease worse than death itself, a MUCH more fitting analogy would be oncologists who leave the world of treating cancer, and instead go work for Big Tobacco to push cigarettes on the public so MORE people can get cancer. That's happened, right? You have documented instances? Or like nutritionists who walk away from helping people eat right and lose weight, so they can become body positivity influencers telling women they should all be 300 pounds. There's a lot of those in the world, right?
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on Jul 12, 2023 17:58:45 GMT
So how many rapists and murderers on death row are you planning to adopt? You know, since you're against killing them, you damn well better be willing to take them in and provide for them, otherwise you're just a hypocrite.
But you ought to be against the state killing them too, since you are against "murder" right?
It's no more murder than this is.
Now, if all murder is wrong, how concerned are you about prisoners being murdered by other inmates? It doesn't happen? Or well they're in prison so they must've done something to deserve it? Either way, you're okay with it, right? Otherwise the anti-death penalty crowd should really be anti-prison completely, since prison is just state sanctioned kidnapping, rape and murder. And how about prison guards who are murdered by inmates? 'Well they KNEW it was a dangerous job when they took it', so it's worth their life, correct?
Everybody can say all they want the death penalty is not a deterrent. It doesn't have to be. Putting down a vicious dog that has attacked a person and tasted their blood isn't going to send a message to all the other dogs to keep their teeth off humans, but it ensures a violent animal that can't be rehabilitated will never be a threat to anybody ever again. And if you think they CAN be rehabilitated, dog or human, let them come home with you.
The death penalty is also far more humane than what most of the people on death row did to get there.
1. The victim is given advance notice they're going to die, it doesn't just blitz them in the back of the head so they never see it coming. People just LOVE the hysterical idea that a guilty conviction means they just take you behind the courthouse and shoot you in the back of the head, but that's not how it works, there's a thing called appeals, which is why capital punishment averages $1M per inmate, because:
2. The victim is told they will have months to years to DECADES to try and escape their fate of dying. No serial killer is EVER so considerate to tag a victim and say 'I'm coming for you in an average of 37 years'. The process is actually so slow acting due to an average of almost 4 decades' appeals most of these people are going to live out their lives and die of old age anyway.
3. Previous methods of execution involved hanging, quick acting, electrocution, quick acting, gas chamber, debatable, and firing squad, quick acting. The new HUMANE form is lethal injection. None of them were tortured for hours on end or buried alive or dismembered piece by piece or wrapped in chains and thrown in the river or soaked in gasoline and set on fire, etc. The ones who made tape recordings or videos of their actions certainly wouldn't carry out a brief killing of their victims, it would be too short to relive and enjoy, they're going to draw it out as long as possible and inflict as much pain and terror on their victims as is possible, because that's what gives them their sexual kicks and makes them feel like big, powerful men.
4. We can always make the death penalty more humane by adopting the same methods used on aborting babies: crushing skulls, injecting poison directly in the heart, severing the spinal cord, tearing their limbs off, etc.. If it's good enough for the vile scum babies who dared to be conceived it can be good enough for someone who spends their years in lockup masturbating to the memories of young girls and women's screams and cries as they were slowly raped and tortured to death.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jul 12, 2023 18:22:22 GMT
If women have no control over their bodies or reproductive rights without abortion, Please quote where anyone has said this. You are disingenuously conflating women's choices in life generally and the specific choice under discussion which, although critical for many, manifestly does not represent the totality of women's rights and freedoms. But I think you must realise this. This seems the fault of any deity who presumably made them so, so hadn't you address your supposed god over this? But with these last two claims you just seem to be getting desperate. Are really here you saying it is not? www.nhs.uk/conditions/abortion/what-happens/#:~:text=Medical%20abortion%20involves%20taking%202,you%20take%20the%20second%20medicine. No one says this. More hyperbole. The onus of proof for all this would be on you, but its relevance to removing health rights of millions of women is somewhat obscure. Sure, there are hypocrites in the world (there is plenty to be found among the religious for instance) but that has nothing to do with woman's choice and their control over their bodies in the matter of abortion, since removed through the unpopular mandate of a conservative religious minority.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jul 12, 2023 18:25:30 GMT
But you ought to be against the state killing them too, since you are against "murder" right?
It's no more murder than this is.
Now, if all murder is wrong,
... Something which I thought we both agreed on, and now in effect you seem to be arguing against yourself in mitigating legal killing - which is all abortion is when allowed as I have said. Have you thought this through? But anyway, as usual I enjoyed all your rhetorical non-sequiturs.
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on Jul 12, 2023 18:51:08 GMT
If women have no control over their bodies or reproductive rights without abortion, Please quote where anyone has said this,
Your words.
WHAT is going to 'deny women control over their bodies and reproductive rights'? Do feel free to elaborate.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jul 12, 2023 18:55:39 GMT
Please quote where anyone has said this, Your words. WHAT is going to 'deny women control over their bodies and reproductive rights'? Do feel free to elaborate.
So it appears I did not write specifically that "women have no control over their bodies or reproductive rights without abortion" then. And I did not write that things will now "deny women ALL control over their bodies and reproductive rights" either, which is what you might wish. I hope that helps. A fine distinction to be sure, but necessary. Any more strawmen?
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on Jul 12, 2023 19:18:01 GMT
Your words. WHAT is going to 'deny women control over their bodies and reproductive rights'? Do feel free to elaborate.
So I did not write "If women have no control over their bodies or reproductive rights without abortion" then. And I did not write "deny women ALL control over their bodies and reproductive rights", as this is as already noted a thread specifically about abortion so some context might be expected as understood I hope that helps.
You said 'deny women control over their bodies and reproductive rights'. WHAT will 'deny women control over their bodies and reproductive rights'? Imposing ANY restrictions whatsoever on abortion? I know y'all love to pretend it just got flat out banned in the country when RvW was overturned, but that's a huge ass lie. So just a bunch of histrionic doublethink. It sure as hell has not denied women control over NOT having sex if they're not ready to deal with the consequences, and it hasn't imposed their control to ONLY have protected sex, with men they actually KNOW, and KNOW what their intentions are, whether they want children or not, whether they can be supportive or not, etc.
We're also back to the fact you can't preach 'choice' when you don't want the people involved to even be informed, educated, to actually have ANY IDEA what goes on, etc. And of course you don't find it odd whatsoever so many people who blindly support abortion, have never actually seen one, and don't actually know WHAT a procedure consists of. Why haven't they? It's JUST a medical procedure like a boob job, C-section, etc., and they show real operations on TV all the time, so why isn't there a channel broadcasting abortions live to educate all the young girls about their choice?
Schools USED to show a film called The Silent Scream to 6th graders, so they could actually see what happens during an abortion. They don't do that anymore, why not? Coincidentally they stopped doing that around the time school sex ed taught girls that a period was 'fluffy stuff' coming out of them. SO informed.
Anytime somebody plays the 'clump of cells/tumor/parasite/tape worm/not a baby' card, you know they flunked biology and didn't learn basic human development. Informed decisions, yeah right.
Now, when pro-lifers protest at abortion clinics, etc., holding up pictures of aborted fetuses...why do the pro-choice people get so mad? They don't like FACTS? They don't like this wonderful service being shown to the public so they can see how great it is? I know in some cases, people who used to identify as pro-choice, for some strange reason, thought that those pictures were photoshopped. But that can't possibly be, women are TOTALLY informed about abortion including what it looks like, what the baby looks like when it's aborted, etc., right? They're not deliberately left in the dark and told to not even think about it, are they?
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jul 12, 2023 19:44:04 GMT
So I did not write "If women have no control over their bodies or reproductive rights without abortion" then. And I did not write "deny women ALL control over their bodies and reproductive rights", as this is as already noted a thread specifically about abortion so some context might be expected as understood I hope that helps. You said 'deny women control over their bodies and reproductive rights'. WHAT will 'deny women control over their bodies and reproductive rights'? Banning abortion will deny women an essential control over their bodies and their reproduction rights. And I still do not say ALL control and rights. No more that I assume that you think abortion should never be an option, even when the woman's life is at risk, after rape or when the foetus is confirmed brain dead. I hope. Repeating a strawman does not make it true. This has never been the case, in any country I can think of, and neither would I ask it. This is correct as it is now up to local jurisdictions to decide. But I have never claimed otherwise. You really like strawman arguments don't you? Nothing gets past you, does it? LOL Probably the same reason why they don't show executions which, just above, you apparently found entirely supportable. Just because something is highly regrettable and sad does not mean it necessarily ought not to be allowed. An answer fit for most of your grandstanding.
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on Jul 12, 2023 23:06:53 GMT
You said 'deny women control over their bodies and reproductive rights'. WHAT will 'deny women control over their bodies and reproductive rights'? Banning abortion will deny women an essential control over their bodies and their reproduction rights. And I still do not say ALL control and rights. No more that I assume that you think abortion should never be an option, even when the woman's life is at risk, after rape or when the foetus is confirmed brain dead. I hope. Repeating a strawman does not make it true.
If you want to play the worst case scenario card, then when I say THOSE abortions are the only ones that should be legal and all other, ie: convenience, pettiness, 'I don't want to be responsible, I want to party!', should be outlawed, you agree, correct? Otherwise you're admitting by omission the instances you mentioned really aren't a priority for you.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jul 13, 2023 19:48:37 GMT
Banning abortion will deny women an essential control over their bodies and their reproduction rights. And I still do not say ALL control and rights. No more that I assume that you think abortion should never be an option, even when the woman's life is at risk, after rape or when the foetus is confirmed brain dead. I hope. Repeating a strawman does not make it true.
If you want to play the worst case scenario card, then when I say THOSE abortions are the only ones that should be legal and all other, ie: convenience, pettiness, 'I don't want to be responsible, I want to party!', should be outlawed, you agree, correct? Otherwise you're admitting by omission the instances you mentioned really aren't a priority for you.
Why should I suddenly agree that only those worst case examples should be allowed when others (below a legal threshold) should not? The priority for me and others of the same opinion in regards to abortion is that rights should be restored to the previous, reasonable level. I am naturally pleased though that you at least have the humanity to allow abortion in some desperate situations. Unfortunately it doesn't always work that way. abcnews.go.com/US/rape-exceptions-abortions-bans-complicated-reality/story?id=88237926time.com/6198062/rape-victim-10-abortion-indiana-ohio/"In practice, health and life exceptions to bans have often proven to be unworkable, except in the most extreme circumstances, and have sometimes prevented physicians from practicing evidence-based medicine. Abortion bans and restrictions have led physicians to delay providing miscarriage management care. Many states allow for the removal of a dead fetus or embryo, but pregnant people who are actively miscarrying may be denied care if there is still detectable fetal cardiac activity or until the miscarriage puts the life of the pregnant person in jeopardy. Mental health exceptions are rare despite the fact that 20% of pregnancy-related deaths are attributable to mental health conditions. Law enforcement involvement is often required to document rape and incest, which often prevents survivors from accessing abortion care. Furthermore, survivors in states where abortion care is restricted can have difficulty finding an abortion provider. In many states there is more than one abortion ban in the books, in some of those states, the exception provisions in the bans are often at odds with each other. These multiple bans and varying exceptions create confusion among patients and providers." www.kff.org/womens-health-policy/issue-brief/a-review-of-exceptions-in-state-abortions-bans-implications-for-the-provision-of-abortion-services/
|
|