|
Post by Karl Aksel on May 1, 2023 0:14:04 GMT
The level of patronising male privilege in the thread is staggering. If a woman has been raped she shouldn't need to jump through hoops to satisfy some morality police that she "qualifies" for an abortion so she doesn't have to carry her rapist's child to term. And if the easiest way to achieve that means that you have to let other women have control over their own bodies rather than telling them what they can and can't do with them, that's hardly a huge sacrifice. All the "good Christian" women out there won't be queuing up for abortions anyway will they? So it'll only be "godless sinners" that would be wanting to "cheat the system" and don't you religious guys ever get bored of pushing your morality on people that really aren't interested in it? You make a great point here. Why is always men who think they should decide these things? Um... It isn't? When you look at the people who are vocally pro life, you'll find they're evenly distributed among men and women. Among politicians there is a greater portion of men who talk about abortion, but that is simply because there's a greater portion of men in politics in general. But as more women actually vote than men, you can't really pin this on men. And you, you're a guy. By your own words, you shouldn't have a say, because you're not a woman. Because you feel you're on the side of women, that's neither here nor there. What, only men with the "right" opinion get to have a say? On the pro-life side, I guarantee you that no one feels they are infringing on women's rights. They are concerned about babies' rights, and why shouldn't men have the right to speak up for babies? "It's not a baby!" No, indeed not, but that's precisely where they disagree. Convince them otherwise, only then can you convince them that women's rights have relevance.
|
|
djorno
Sophomore
@djorno
Posts: 322
Likes: 81
|
Abortion
May 1, 2023 7:41:27 GMT
via mobile
Post by djorno on May 1, 2023 7:41:27 GMT
I would give a proper response to this but quite frankly it would be pointless because you’re clearly someone brainwashed to the eyeballs with wokeism. It’s because you CAN’T give a proper response to this. You don’t actually have an argument or a case. You have absolutely NOTHING of substance to add because you’re asleep! So, since you’ve essentially conceded the discussion - I’ll rest my case on that alone. That’s nice. Btw have you always been this religious, bro?
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on May 1, 2023 19:53:23 GMT
It’s because you CAN’T give a proper response to this. You don’t actually have an argument or a case. You have absolutely NOTHING of substance to add because you’re asleep! So, since you’ve essentially conceded the discussion - I’ll rest my case on that alone. That’s nice. Btw have you always been this religious, bro? No. Back when I was a Christian I was obviously way more “religious” than I am now (which is 0%). Have you always been this poor at debating……bro? 🤷🏽♂️
|
|
djorno
Sophomore
@djorno
Posts: 322
Likes: 81
|
Abortion
May 1, 2023 21:33:04 GMT
via mobile
Post by djorno on May 1, 2023 21:33:04 GMT
That’s nice. Btw have you always been this religious, bro? No. Back when I was a Christian I was obviously way more “religious” than I am now (which is 0%). Have you always been this poor at debating……bro? 🤷🏽♂️ You’re a woke fundamentalist. And yes wokeism is a cultish secular religion.
|
|
jackbrock
Sophomore
@jackbrock
Posts: 119
Likes: 20
|
Post by jackbrock on May 1, 2023 22:53:35 GMT
You make a great point here. Why is always men who think they should decide these things? Um... It isn't? When you look at the people who are vocally pro life, you'll find they're evenly distributed among men and women. Among politicians there is a greater portion of men who talk about abortion, but that is simply because there's a greater portion of men in politics in general. But as more women actually vote than men, you can't really pin this on men. And you, you're a guy. By your own words, you shouldn't have a say, because you're not a woman. Because you feel you're on the side of women, that's neither here nor there. What, only men with the "right" opinion get to have a say? On the pro-life side, I guarantee you that no one feels they are infringing on women's rights. They are concerned about babies' rights, and why shouldn't men have the right to speak up for babies? "It's not a baby!" No, indeed not, but that's precisely where they disagree. Convince them otherwise, only then can you convince them that women's rights have relevance. On the pro-life side, I guarantee you that no one feels they are infringing on women's rights. They are concerned about babies' rights, and why shouldn't men have the right to speak up for babies?
Interesting thought, but these pro-life people aren't on the side of baby's rights, they are concerned about fetal rights. They have little to no care or support for the fetus once it's born. How do I know this? You don't see these pro-lifers helping with the expenses (and other things) such as giving cash, helping the mother get a decent job, helping with daycare.
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on May 1, 2023 22:55:03 GMT
|
|
jackbrock
Sophomore
@jackbrock
Posts: 119
Likes: 20
|
Post by jackbrock on May 1, 2023 22:58:24 GMT
No. Back when I was a Christian I was obviously way more “religious” than I am now (which is 0%). Have you always been this poor at debating……bro? 🤷🏽♂️ You’re a woke fundamentalist. And yes wokeism is a cultish secular religion. When you can't think of saying something thought out, insult.
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on May 1, 2023 23:02:57 GMT
The level of patronising male privilege in the thread is staggering. If a woman has been raped she shouldn't need to jump through hoops to satisfy some morality police that she "qualifies" for an abortion so she doesn't have to carry her rapist's child to term. And if the easiest way to achieve that means that you have to let other women have control over their own bodies rather than telling them what they can and can't do with them, that's hardly a huge sacrifice. All the "good Christian" women out there won't be queuing up for abortions anyway will they? So it'll only be "godless sinners" that would be wanting to "cheat the system" and don't you religious guys ever get bored of pushing your morality on people that really aren't interested in it?
I'm still confused how so many women just KNOW it's the rapist's baby and not ANY other man she was sleeping with in the same time period. It actually implies all sexually active women are safe, rapists don't want used goods. So who's worried about rape pregnancies? Just all the virgin women in the world?
|
|
|
Post by Karl Aksel on May 2, 2023 6:53:13 GMT
Um... It isn't? When you look at the people who are vocally pro life, you'll find they're evenly distributed among men and women. Among politicians there is a greater portion of men who talk about abortion, but that is simply because there's a greater portion of men in politics in general. But as more women actually vote than men, you can't really pin this on men. And you, you're a guy. By your own words, you shouldn't have a say, because you're not a woman. Because you feel you're on the side of women, that's neither here nor there. What, only men with the "right" opinion get to have a say? On the pro-life side, I guarantee you that no one feels they are infringing on women's rights. They are concerned about babies' rights, and why shouldn't men have the right to speak up for babies? "It's not a baby!" No, indeed not, but that's precisely where they disagree. Convince them otherwise, only then can you convince them that women's rights have relevance. On the pro-life side, I guarantee you that no one feels they are infringing on women's rights. They are concerned about babies' rights, and why shouldn't men have the right to speak up for babies?
Interesting thought, but these pro-life people aren't on the side of baby's rights, they are concerned about fetal rights. They have little to no care or support for the fetus once it's born. I assure you, they are quite opposed to infanticide as well. They don't do that for pregnant women, either. This is a red herring.
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on May 2, 2023 22:28:09 GMT
No. Back when I was a Christian I was obviously way more “religious” than I am now (which is 0%). Have you always been this poor at debating……bro? 🤷🏽♂️ You’re a woke fundamentalist. And yes wokeism is a cultish secular religion. Okay, well “secular religion” is literally an oxymoron, but if that’s what you want to call it that’s fine. It only shows just how absurd religion is (conceptually) even to those who actually practice it like you. So this type of projection is actually encouraging. I know you people also think “woke” is some kind of insult, but that’s only because you’re all fucking sleep, lol. As far as I’m concerned, the world will be better when the rest of you wake up.
|
|
djorno
Sophomore
@djorno
Posts: 322
Likes: 81
|
Post by djorno on May 2, 2023 22:39:10 GMT
You’re a woke fundamentalist. And yes wokeism is a cultish secular religion. Okay, well “secular religion” is literally an oxymoron, but if that’s what you want to call it that’s fine. It only shows just how absurd religion is (conceptually) even to those who actually practice it like you. So this type of projection is actually encouraging. I know you people also think “woke” is some kind of insult, but that’s only because you’re all fucking sleep, lol. As far as I’m concerned, the world will be better when the rest of you wake up. Your confirmation is duly noted.
|
|
jackbrock
Sophomore
@jackbrock
Posts: 119
Likes: 20
|
Post by jackbrock on May 2, 2023 22:42:50 GMT
On the pro-life side, I guarantee you that no one feels they are infringing on women's rights. They are concerned about babies' rights, and why shouldn't men have the right to speak up for babies?
Interesting thought, but these pro-life people aren't on the side of baby's rights, they are concerned about fetal rights. They have little to no care or support for the fetus once it's born. I assure you, they are quite opposed to infanticide as well. They don't do that for pregnant women, either. This is a red herring. I would hope the pro lifers would not be into infanticide. It's an oxymoron. Not sure why you brought this up. They don't do that for pregnant women, either. This is a red herring.It's not a red herring. It illustrates the hypocrisy of the pro lifers: They don't care one bit about the baby after it's born, they only care about the fetus. Caring for a baby takes a lot of resources - financial and emotional. Try to raise a kid on minimum wage.
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on May 2, 2023 22:50:11 GMT
Okay, well “secular religion” is literally an oxymoron, but if that’s what you want to call it that’s fine. It only shows just how absurd religion is (conceptually) even to those who actually practice it like you. So this type of projection is actually encouraging. I know you people also think “woke” is some kind of insult, but that’s only because you’re all fucking sleep, lol. As far as I’m concerned, the world will be better when the rest of you wake up. Your confirmation is duly noted. Good. Get back to me when you can actually think up an insult that’s “insulting”, lol 😂
|
|
|
Post by Karl Aksel on May 3, 2023 6:18:56 GMT
I assure you, they are quite opposed to infanticide as well. They don't do that for pregnant women, either. This is a red herring. I would hope the pro lifers would not be into infanticide. It's an oxymoron. Not sure why you brought this up. You brought it up. If you didn't have infanticide in mind, then you are comparing apples and fork lifts. What you're saying simply isn't true. If what you said were true, they would have to be indifferent to infanticide. As it is, they are just as opposed to abortion as they are to infanticide, so there is no hypocrisy here. And they are just as non-supportive of the pregnant soon-to-be mother, as they are of the mother who has given birth. So again, no hypocrisy.
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on May 5, 2023 22:40:39 GMT
I would hope the pro lifers would not be into infanticide. It's an oxymoron. Not sure why you brought this up. You brought it up. If you didn't have infanticide in mind, then you are comparing apples and fork lifts. What you're saying simply isn't true. If what you said were true, they would have to be indifferent to infanticide. As it is, they are just as opposed to abortion as they are to infanticide, so there is no hypocrisy here. And they are just as non-supportive of the pregnant soon-to-be mother, as they are of the mother who has given birth. So again, no hypocrisy.
The real problem I believe you will find with trying to ban abortion by force of government is your lack of essential information. 1) You do not know when life begins. 2) The Bible does not say when life is embodied. 3) If life began at conception, and if ordinary contraceptives discard the products of conception, wouldn't you have to ban those too? Good luck with that. 4) You do not know who has been raped or not, and are not likely to find out any time soon. It can appear that it is not really about the "innocent life," but rather about you feeling like you have any idea what you are doing, when you obviously do not. That aside, the rate of abortions is likely to remain about the same whatever stupid laws you try to pass. Abortion rates might even go up. There are Christian and other organizations that provide support for mothers who might otherwise not be able to provide for their child. That is not just financial, but training for jobs and finding employment for them. They put their money, not other people's money, on the line. That makes sense. Using the force of government does not. Abortion is beyond the purview of government.
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on May 5, 2023 23:34:39 GMT
I assure you, they are quite opposed to infanticide as well. They don't do that for pregnant women, either. This is a red herring. I would hope the pro lifers would not be into infanticide. It's an oxymoron. Not sure why you brought this up. They don't do that for pregnant women, either. This is a red herring.It's not a red herring. It illustrates the hypocrisy of the pro lifers: They don't care one bit about the baby after it's born, they only care about the fetus. Caring for a baby takes a lot of resources - financial and emotional. Try to raise a kid on minimum wage.
You wouldn't care to prove that, would you? And I don't mean 'GOP passes bill/cuts budget', I mean the actual PEOPLE. Your heart bleeds so much for those women, tell us what YOU do to help them out.
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on May 5, 2023 23:35:44 GMT
I would hope the pro lifers would not be into infanticide. It's an oxymoron. Not sure why you brought this up. You brought it up. If you didn't have infanticide in mind, then you are comparing apples and fork lifts. What you're saying simply isn't true. If what you said were true, they would have to be indifferent to infanticide. As it is, they are just as opposed to abortion as they are to infanticide, so there is no hypocrisy here. And they are just as non-supportive of the pregnant soon-to-be mother, as they are of the mother who has given birth. So again, no hypocrisy.
If pro-lifers were indifferent to infanticide they wouldn't oppose 3rd trimester/post-birth abortions ie: 'take it out of the mother alive and kill it'.
|
|
|
Post by novastar6 on May 5, 2023 23:40:17 GMT
Um... It isn't? When you look at the people who are vocally pro life, you'll find they're evenly distributed among men and women. Among politicians there is a greater portion of men who talk about abortion, but that is simply because there's a greater portion of men in politics in general. But as more women actually vote than men, you can't really pin this on men. And you, you're a guy. By your own words, you shouldn't have a say, because you're not a woman. Because you feel you're on the side of women, that's neither here nor there. What, only men with the "right" opinion get to have a say? On the pro-life side, I guarantee you that no one feels they are infringing on women's rights. They are concerned about babies' rights, and why shouldn't men have the right to speak up for babies? "It's not a baby!" No, indeed not, but that's precisely where they disagree. Convince them otherwise, only then can you convince them that women's rights have relevance. On the pro-life side, I guarantee you that no one feels they are infringing on women's rights. They are concerned about babies' rights, and why shouldn't men have the right to speak up for babies?
Interesting thought, but these pro-life people aren't on the side of baby's rights, they are concerned about fetal rights. They have little to no care or support for the fetus once it's born. How do I know this? You don't see these pro-lifers helping with the expenses (and other things) such as giving cash, helping the mother get a decent job, helping with daycare.
You really think pregnant women/mothers get NO support whatsoever? Who's getting serviced at the food banks then? Why do schools have free lunch programs in summer? Who qualifies for commodity distributions?
|
|
|
Post by Karl Aksel on May 6, 2023 7:40:52 GMT
You brought it up. If you didn't have infanticide in mind, then you are comparing apples and fork lifts. What you're saying simply isn't true. If what you said were true, they would have to be indifferent to infanticide. As it is, they are just as opposed to abortion as they are to infanticide, so there is no hypocrisy here. And they are just as non-supportive of the pregnant soon-to-be mother, as they are of the mother who has given birth. So again, no hypocrisy.
The real problem I believe you will find with trying to ban abortion by force of government is your lack of essential information. 1) You do not know when life begins. 2) The Bible does not say when life is embodied. 3) If life began at conception, and if ordinary contraceptives discard the products of conception, wouldn't you have to ban those too? Good luck with that. 4) You do not know who has been raped or not, and are not likely to find out any time soon. It can appear that it is not really about the "innocent life," but rather about you feeling like you have any idea what you are doing, when you obviously do not. That aside, the rate of abortions is likely to remain about the same whatever stupid laws you try to pass. Abortion rates might even go up. There are Christian and other organizations that provide support for mothers who might otherwise not be able to provide for their child. That is not just financial, but training for jobs and finding employment for them. They put their money, not other people's money, on the line. That makes sense. Using the force of government does not. Abortion is beyond the purview of government. You say "you" an awful lot here. I'd just like to remind you, in case you weren't using the pronoun in the general sense, that I'm pro-choice.
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on May 6, 2023 9:46:55 GMT
The real problem I believe you will find with trying to ban abortion by force of government is your lack of essential information. 1) You do not know when life begins. 2) The Bible does not say when life is embodied. 3) If life began at conception, and if ordinary contraceptives discard the products of conception, wouldn't you have to ban those too? Good luck with that. 4) You do not know who has been raped or not, and are not likely to find out any time soon. It can appear that it is not really about the "innocent life," but rather about you feeling like you have any idea what you are doing, when you obviously do not. That aside, the rate of abortions is likely to remain about the same whatever stupid laws you try to pass. Abortion rates might even go up. There are Christian and other organizations that provide support for mothers who might otherwise not be able to provide for their child. That is not just financial, but training for jobs and finding employment for them. They put their money, not other people's money, on the line. That makes sense. Using the force of government does not. Abortion is beyond the purview of government. You say "you" an awful lot here. I'd just like to remind you, in case you weren't using the pronoun in the general sense, that I'm pro-choice.
I had intended to include user links to you and novastar6, and someone else, I think captainbryce also. Yes it is a plural "you." I am sorry for omitting the user links and any confusion.
|
|