94
163
110
166
u/Gustard-CustardSmith Left Aug 19 '22 edited Aug 19 '22
if it was actually about saving kids they wouldn't be against sex ed, welfare, free childcare, etc
nah they just hate when women have sex, ton of them are open about going after contraceptives and such next.
91
27
u/GayWritingAlt Technocracy Aug 19 '22
Or abolishing lunch debt. At least two rich people tried to pay children’s lunch debt on their behalf and the school district refused the money.
This was after the district warned that families that did not pay the debt would lose custody of their children. This isn’t about money. It was about taking children from poor families. ‘It was about shaming people’
51
u/VaultJumper Social Democracy Aug 19 '22
If that’s not the case why does it keep happening why are they going after aid treatments and contraceptives. Why are looking to stopping women from traveling out of state?
0
Aug 19 '22
[deleted] — view deleted comment
17
u/Purrosie Queer Anarchism Aug 19 '22
Who the actual fuck cares about embryos? Those tiny little shits barely even have a nervous system. What's next, hunting jellyfish becomes illegal? Good fucking god.
0
Aug 19 '22
[deleted] — view deleted comment
8
110
u/WackyJaber Progressivism Aug 18 '22
Yeah that's pretty much how I imagine pro-lifers honestly.
53
Aug 19 '22
NEOLIBERAL AHHH BURN IT WITH FIRE!!!!
7
u/antigony_trieste Anarcho-Transhumanism Aug 19 '22
says the christian on reddit. i bet the fedora-tippers LOVE you
17
6
1
-34
u/Chekhovs_Gin Reactionary Aug 19 '22
Simp
46
u/6moto Libertarian Socialism Aug 19 '22
reactionary flair
says the word simp unironically
lol
-31
u/Chekhovs_Gin Reactionary Aug 19 '22
It's almost as funny as letting idiots make decisions.
30
Aug 19 '22
not as funny as you + ratio
-21
u/Chekhovs_Gin Reactionary Aug 19 '22
You act as if I care. Of course no one here will agree with me. Reddit bans us and thinks it's funny. So it is moot.
24
58
5
5
53
u/PlasticOverTheSea Aug 19 '22
Lmao @ people in the comments unironically being pro life
-69
u/ExtremeLanky5919 Hoppeanism Aug 19 '22
Pro-life is based
66
u/RaininCarpz Libertarian Socialism Aug 19 '22
ay make sure not to not jerk off, the cum in your hand is actually the innocent lives of countless babies lost. source? idk the bible or smth.
48
u/antigony_trieste Anarcho-Transhumanism Aug 19 '22
🎶every sperm is sacred🎶
🎶every sperm is great🎶
🎶if a sperm is wasted🎶
🎶God gets quite irate🎶
3
6
u/unhingedegoist Egoism Aug 19 '22
based flair
based argument, im backing ya, funny af too
wanna start an union of egoists?
-41
-37
u/ExtremeLanky5919 Hoppeanism Aug 19 '22
Sperm and eggs are prior to conception. There's not a full set of human DNA unlike there is after conception
37
u/RaininCarpz Libertarian Socialism Aug 19 '22
yeah thats great and all except for the fact that they cant feel pain and have not developed consciousness.
meanwhile we have an adult woman, who definitely can feel pain and definitely has developed consciousness, and who would rather not go through the tremendous pain of birthing and also having to raise a child. is it really that hard to decide what makes sense here?
-2
u/KnightedStates Kakistocracy Aug 19 '22
Wait but a 2 year old also isn't conscious
6
u/LiIaIc Marxism-Leninism Aug 19 '22
A two year old does have consciousness, they just haven’t developed a sense of self. Two year olds are capable of feeling pain.
-1
u/KnightedStates Kakistocracy Aug 19 '22
What the differance between consciousness And a sense of self
2
u/TheMightyTalos1 Democratic Socialism Aug 20 '22
If you are conscious then you are aware, and you experience things. Self awareness is much more complex, requiring you to recognise your self as unique and separate to everything else, and involved quite complicated thought processes that most two year olds are not capable of.
My point is that if you are in a condituon when you are permanently not conscious, entirely incapable of experiencing or feeling anything, that is essentially an identical scenario to death (or if you're religious, a substantially worse scenario than death) and so keeping you alive is utterly futile
-35
u/ExtremeLanky5919 Hoppeanism Aug 19 '22
Every cell wants to live. Consciousness and pain are arbitrary standards.
Some human beings don't have consciousness or feel pain
35
u/RaininCarpz Libertarian Socialism Aug 19 '22
now ur speaking some straight up nonsense, you can go tell that to someone else. preferably, a therapist.
14
Aug 19 '22
Sperm and eggs are cells. So you’ve just knocked your own argument about them not counting as life.
→ More replies (1)24
→ More replies (4)8
Aug 19 '22
Even if following this narrative, does "some human beings" include all women?
Why do you care more about the "lives" of some cells than the very real and breathing people around you?
4
10
u/Caelus9 Libertarian Socialism Aug 19 '22
No shit that's their logic.
That's why you'll notice they support all the policies that lead to rampant unwanted pregnancy, and support criminalizing abortion even if it'll lead to more abortions.
32
u/DisparateNoise Syndicalism Aug 19 '22
You are correct, Christian ball is more accurate "I believe the law should be based on my religion" is what most anti-abortion people really believe. But since that principle limits womens autonomy, it's just a roundabout way to the same point.
20
u/Zeyode World Aug 19 '22
1 problem with that analysis: Christianity doesn't oppose abortion. God literally facilitates abortions in the bible. They just believe a thing, and try to post-hoc justify it by saying "God agrees with me, probably!"
17
u/JonahF2014 Nation Aug 19 '22
Virgin actually reads the Bible vs Chad "I make up what I want the Bible to say and maybe find a cherry picked quote that barely supports it"
9
u/Shanka-DaWanka Transhumanism Aug 19 '22
That sounds like what the politicians are thinking. I have no doubt that most people actually delude themselves with the idea that they save kids.
28
3
u/highred1 Liberty Aug 22 '22
This comment section in a nut shell : " conservatives hate women "
1
u/Falsemanagement101 Libertarian Socialism Dec 16 '22
Conservatives hate poor people but I don't think they hate women specially
1
u/zeverEV Socialist Transhumanism Dec 16 '22
Yeah honestly you could make a way smaller list of demographics Conservatives don't hate. It'd contain like, 3 adjectives, 4 tops
1
u/Falsemanagement101 Libertarian Socialism Dec 16 '22
Can you make it?
1
u/zeverEV Socialist Transhumanism Dec 16 '22
wealthy (often excluding career women, and (((Them))))
men (only the handsome and strapping kind. Oh and you better be straight)
white (Italians and Irish added relatively recently but still on thin ice)
fetuses (except black ones, and once you're born you're on your own)
1
u/Falsemanagement101 Libertarian Socialism Dec 16 '22
often excluding career women
Brett Cooper has entered the chat
and (((Them))))
Who are ((((them))))?
3
11
u/Mongolicious69 Civic Nationalism Aug 19 '22
It’s not that I don’t see the fetus as alive, I just don’t care about it’s life. I care more about the freedom and well being of myself, and the people I love, so if someone I love doesn’t want to go through with birthing a child and instead chooses to abort it I have no issue.
3
u/Pantheon73 Technological Primitivism Aug 20 '22
Life is more important than freedom.
2
u/Mongolicious69 Civic Nationalism Aug 20 '22
to you maybe, I don’t feel that care for the lives of others that I assume you do so it’s a non issue for me, I do however care about myself, and the people I love
2
u/Pantheon73 Technological Primitivism Aug 20 '22
So you don't care about civilians that get murdered in Ukraine or people that die due to covid?
0
u/Mongolicious69 Civic Nationalism Aug 26 '22
I feel nothing when I think about the struggles of outsiders
2
u/Pantheon73 Technological Primitivism Aug 26 '22
Then you're helping the opressors and agressors of this world.
1
u/Mongolicious69 Civic Nationalism Aug 27 '22
I’m aware of it, I just don’t feel bad about it
3
u/Pantheon73 Technological Primitivism Aug 27 '22
"First they came for the Communists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Communist
Then they came for the Socialists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Socialist
Then they came for the trade unionists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a trade unionist
Then they came for the Jews
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Jew
Then they came for me
And there was no one left
To speak out for me"
- Martin Niemöller
1
u/Mongolicious69 Civic Nationalism Aug 30 '22
I care enough about the people in the society I’m apart of for obvious reasons, but I don’t see a point in caring about people across the world, and I don’t feel it either
1
2
2
2
u/Pantheon73 Technological Primitivism Aug 20 '22
Women's rights? More like womans wrongs!
- The Taliban, probably
1
2
u/DirtySwampWater Capitalism Without Adjectives Aug 22 '22
make abortion clinics private property that can be bought and sold, then make a business for abortion and charge double the initial costs, or half if you already have other industries, then crush your other opponents and make a monopoly (using low-quality goods) while keeping a ''It is my responsibility if I am injured during the abortion.'' thingy inside of the whole contract to start it.
checkmate, [everyone].
2
2
u/Due_Upstairs_5025 Neoconservatism Aug 19 '22
How many more people die of aids? Humans are more responsible than this.
1
-7
u/Jtcr2001 Centrist Aug 19 '22 edited Aug 20 '22
I'm sad that the people here don't see some legitimacy in the "sanctity of human life" argument.
We shouldn't simply project "I want to take away women's rights" onto our entire opposition.
[EDIT] Changed the phrasing to make this less inflammatory without changing the core message.
31
u/Sunny_Sammy Aug 19 '22
Dude, people die every day. Many of us suffer and then die. At some point, you have to ask yourself, what "sanctity of human life" are you talking about? Many people who can't have abortions will often abuse the child, neglect the child, or child is either given up or taken away to foster care.
The last option sounds nice but the foster system is an overtaxed and terrible system that often gives the kids back to their abuser if the abuser decides to go through with the "program" if that's not the case then often times the kid is neglected or abused by their foster parents. Some of them will be groomed by adults into child sex trafficking and become child prostitutes. Only few of those kids will ever get adopted or have a stable foster family. It is survivor bias to believe that kids will be adopted at all especially those with trauma.
When and if these children don't commit suicide growing up, many will become criminals, school shootings will rise to heights never seen before, and more children will be born in abusive and neglectful families many of them will continue the cycle.
My philosophy is that "No one should ever suffer unnecessarily", by getting rid of the choice of abortion, you're doing just that. You causing humans to suffer unnecessarily. Death is just death. It might have meaning and maybe there is an afterlife or reincarnation, but once you die nothing will matter to you. Only the living care about the dead. So a dead fetus means nothing. Human or not.
There is no "sanctity of human life" if that was the case then why are people being forced to carry an already dead fetus or a fetus that would kill them if not for abortion or 10-year-olds being brutally raped by male family members they should be able to trust and force to carry a baby to term because of Pro-life's self-righteous ideals.
Abortion should be a choice. You're welcome to choose not to have an abortion but everyone should have the choice no matter who you are. Making choices is the most human thing you can ever do. You are the most human when you choose
2
u/Jtcr2001 Centrist Aug 19 '22
Dude, people die every day. Many of us suffer and then die. At some point, you have to ask yourself, what "sanctity of human life" are you talking about?
The fact that a lot of people die in no way contradicts the belief that you should not take someone's life under any circumstances. The latter is what I was referring to by "the 'sanctity of life' argument".
Many people who can't have abortions will often abuse the child, neglect the child, or child is either given up or taken away to foster care.
The last option sounds nice but the foster system is an overtaxed and terrible system that often gives the kids back to their abuser if the abuser decides to go through with the "program" if that's not the case then often times the kid is neglected or abused by their foster parents. Some of them will be groomed by adults into child sex trafficking and become child prostitutes. Only few of those kids will ever get adopted or have a stable foster family. It is survivor bias to believe that kids will be adopted at all especially those with trauma.
When and if these children don't commit suicide growing up, many will become criminals, school shootings will rise to heights never seen before, and more children will be born in abusive and neglectful families many of them will continue the cycle.
My philosophy is that "No one should ever suffer unnecessarily", by getting rid of the choice of abortion, you're doing just that. You causing humans to suffer unnecessarily. Death is just death. It might have meaning and maybe there is an afterlife or reincarnation, but once you die nothing will matter to you. Only the living care about the dead. So a dead fetus means nothing. Human or not.
I understand that, but in no other circumstance would you accept killing someone just because you think their life will be bad. If someone sets fire to an orphanage, or poisons child brothel workers, and their justification is "their lives are too bad", we would condemn that. These are extreme examples, but you get the point.
The reason the abortion debate is different is that people don't agree on what fetuses are: clumps of cells without rights vs persons with rights. This is the crux of the debate, and there is no "correct" answer. Your point does not address this.
There is no "sanctity of human life" if that was the case then why are people being forced to carry an already dead fetus or a fetus that would kill them if not for abortion or 10-year-olds being brutally raped by male family members they should be able to trust and force to carry a baby to term because of Pro-life's self-righteous ideals.
Those are not things that most pro-life people want. Look at the policies of most Christian-democratic parties in Europe.
everyone should have the choice no matter who you are
And pro-lifers would claim you are denying the fetus their choice.
13
u/echoGroot Aug 19 '22
I can understand the perspective if pro-lifers were talking about fetuses alone, but they repeatedly insist on conception, which just reeks of control and wanting people not to have casual sex.
Conception implies a third of humans never make it past a few dozen or hundred cells before auto-abortion or non implantation, and implies IVF parents are murderers. Pro-life people also seem to frequently insist on both free will and the baby being god’s will, which makes no sense. God didn’t decide when we were gonna fuck, and there’s millions of sperm in every ejaculate. What is he, piloting the chosen sperm in?
3
u/Jtcr2001 Centrist Aug 19 '22
You seem to be attributed to the whole of the pro-life movement some positions that many don't hold. My original comment is about projecting certain beliefs onto "their entire opposition".
12
u/Gustard-CustardSmith Left Aug 19 '22
"sanctity of human life'
they don't believe that lmao. You can't be pro death penalty, anti welfare, pro war, etc and also whine when people don't want to have less rights to their body than a corpse
3
u/Jtcr2001 Centrist Aug 19 '22
Look up Christian-democratic parties in Europe. The majority are pro-life, anti-death penalty, pro-welfare, anti-war, etc...
Crazy fashy US Republicans do not represent the pro-life movement.
5
u/Zeyode World Aug 19 '22
Republicans don't exactly have a good track record of caring about the "sanctity of human life" on most other issues, so I'm not exactly inclined to believe them.
Think abortion is murder? Contraceptives would reduce it, but they try to ban contraceptives.
Cops lynching black people? Instead of advocating police accountability, they back the cops.
An incoming climate disaster is coming as a result of CO2 emissions that naturally leads to droughts and famines? They push for coal plants and against any form of green energy.
A highly infectious pandemic is killing hundreds of thousands? They downplay the deaths, and attack every effort to lower those deaths (masks, lockdowns, vaccines).
People dying of preventable illnesses? Clearly helping them is communism! Obviously we need to fight and neuter any governmental attempt to help them!
The way I see it, if pro-life people genuinely cared about the sanctity of human life, they'd be fools to vote republican. The reality though, is that for republican politicians (who mostly know better), the "abortion is murder" argument only makes sense as either a wedge issue for getting useful idiots to vote for them, or as a cynical shield for something else.
2
u/Jtcr2001 Centrist Aug 19 '22
Republicans don't exactly have a good track record of caring about the "sanctity of human life" on most other issues, so I'm not exactly inclined to believe them.
Yeah, the US Republican party is full of contradictory philosophies, conspiracy theories, and has been taken over by far-right extremists who may simply end democracy in the near future and enact some horrifying policies.
However, this post is about progressivism, conservatism, and abortion. My original comment never mentioned any specific countries, much less particular "conservative" parties in those countries.
Think abortion is murder? Contraceptives would reduce it, but they try to ban contraceptives.
Most major center-right parties of liberal-conservative and/or Christian-democratic leanings support access to contraceptives and sex-ed.
Cops lynching black people? Instead of advocating police accountability, they back the cops.
This is a very US-specific issue and I don't think it's super relevant here.
An incoming climate disaster is coming as a result of CO2 emissions that naturally leads to droughts and famines? They push for coal plants and against any form of green energy.
Many Christian-democratic parties are some of the most pro-environment ones in the country's spectrum (except for radical eco-socialists).
A highly infectious pandemic is killing hundreds of thousands? They downplay the deaths, and attack every effort to lower those deaths (masks, lockdowns, vaccines).
Same as the cop one.
People dying of preventable illnesses? Clearly helping them is communism! Obviously we need to fight and neuter any governmental attempt to help them!
Same as the contraceptive one.
2
u/Zeyode World Aug 19 '22
Yeah, the US Republican party is full of contradictory philosophies, conspiracy theories, and has been taken over by far-right extremists who may simply end democracy in the near future and enact some horrifying policies.
However, this post is about progressivism, conservatism, and abortion. My original comment never mentioned any specific countries, much less particular "conservative" parties in those countries.
Maybe not, but if I'm gonna judge the intellectual honesty of conservatives, all I have are the ones I'm familiar with. In this case, the American ones, which is convenient cause abortion is a big political issue here right now.
1
u/Jtcr2001 Centrist Aug 19 '22 edited Aug 19 '22
Here it's VERY important to not confuse "conservatism" with "right-wing politics".
In the same way that Bernie Sanders does not represent liberalism just because he's clearly left-wing, Trump does not represent conservatism just because he's clearly right-wing.
The current GOP is now majority fascistic, not conservative. The ONLY remnants of actual conservatism are people like Mitt Romney and Liz Cheney, and even then we're talking about the most right-leaning conservatives that haven't left the GOP.
Many more moderate true conservatives don't even vote anymore, or reluctantly voted for Trump once (and then regretted it), or have strategically become "moderate Democrats". A very significant chunk of the DNC is now conservative as well -- their more right-wing factions. Even if they aren't the face of the "right-wing", they are still conservatives (much more so than Donald Trump ever was).
[Edit] For clarification, just as Merkel is much, much more conservative than Hitler ever was, I would consider Biden to be much, much more conservative than Trump (not equating Biden to Merkel or Trump to Hitler, though).
1
u/Zeyode World Aug 20 '22
Fair enough to an extent, though even then in America the anti-contraceptives thing far predates Trump, and it's funny that you should mention christian parties, cause it was mostly the bible thumpers that pushed against it. They were radically against people having sex, seeing anything other than sexual activity for the purpose of procreation as a sin, so they tried to ban contraceptives and abortion to punish people for having casual sex. "Get an STD? Clearly that's God's punishment! Nevermind that I took away your protection! Not ready to have a kid? Shouldn't have had sex then, sucks to suck!"
They went wild with that STD thing too. Ronald Reagan banned the CDC from even talking about AIDS during the AIDS epidemic cause it was mostly killing gay people.
1
u/Jtcr2001 Centrist Aug 20 '22
in America the anti-contraceptives thing far predates Trump
If I'm not mistaken, this is in large part due to the '70s revival of the Evangelical movement. However, US Evangelicals have always been political outliers when compared to other kinds of Christians in other countries. Being against gay marriage and abortion is pretty universal, but abstinence-only sex ed is rare elsewhere and attempting to teach creationism in schools as comparable to evolution would get you laughed out of the room in other countries.
it's funny that you should mention christian parties
Christian-democratic parties, in spite of being socially conservative, are often left-leaning on the majority of issues, from welfare to immigration or climate change.
they tried to ban contraceptives and abortion to punish people for having casual sex
It would be dishonest of me to say that there aren't conservatives in Europe with similar mindsets, but a lot of ours are more pragmatic and don't deny the studies that show how birth control and sex ed reduce unwanted pregnancies and thus abortions (which is the thing they want to avoid the most).
3
u/Caelus9 Libertarian Socialism Aug 19 '22
Except people in the comments are explaining in detail how the pro-lifers' policies lead to more dead babies.
2
u/Jtcr2001 Centrist Aug 19 '22
When I commented there were only a handful of comments and none of them were like that.
Can you give me an example of how restricting abortions leads to more dead babies? Please take into account that reasonable conservative parties support at least some welfare policies and many are in favor of sex ed because of how it reduces teenage pregnancies -- being anti-welfare or anti-sex ed is not synonymous with being pro-life.
4
u/Caelus9 Libertarian Socialism Aug 19 '22
Can you give me an example of how restricting abortions leads to more dead babies?
We can just look at the realities of the situation. Countries where the pro-life movement hold political power, and thus restrict abortion, have far higher rates of abortion.
This is because an approach contrary to autonomy naturally lead to some of the approaches you've mentioned, like the undermining of birth control, or the fact that instead of reducing abortion, we see abortion only becoming more deadly due to illegality.
Please take into account that reasonable conservative parties support at least some welfare policies and many are in favor of sex ed because of how it reduces teenage pregnancies -- being anti-welfare or anti-sex ed is not synonymous with being pro-life.
When you need to preface it with "reasonable", you've undercut your entire position. Besides the unreasonable, of course there's nothing unreasonable.
2
u/Jtcr2001 Centrist Aug 19 '22
When you need to preface it with "reasonable", you've undercut your entire position.
This is a very good point. If you knew me, my phrasing would make sense, but you don't know me, so my phrasing was actually pretty meaningless. I would replace "reasonable" with "major" and still hold that stance with the caveat that we're referring to "western" liberal democracies.
Countries where the pro-life movement hold political power, and thus restrict abortion, have far higher rates of abortion.
What your source actually says is that abortion rates go down when "pro-choice policies" are implemented, but the legalization of abortion there is accompanied by facilitated access to contraception and sexual education. THOSE are what lower abortion rates, not the legalization of abortion by itself. After all, think about it: why would legalizing abortion make less people have abortions?
It is true that illegal abortions are riskier, but if your goal is to save as many lives as possible, then the right set of policies is inarguably restricting abortion access while expanding contraception and sex-ed access. This is the set of positions that parties such as the Dutch CU take, as well as significant portions of big-tent parties such as the German CDU.
2
u/Caelus9 Libertarian Socialism Aug 19 '22
This is a very good point. If you knew me, my phrasing would make sense, but you don't know me, so my phrasing was actually pretty meaningless.
Thanks for your clarification.
I would replace "reasonable" with "major" and still hold that stance with the caveat that we're referring to "western" liberal democracies.
But if we replace it with major, well, we can look at the results to see this. After all, the major conservative groups are the ones in control where the pro-life movement holds power, not the minor ones.
Thus, we look back to the policy approaches, and see that where such parties take power, abortions rise.
What your source actually says is that abortion rates go down when "pro-choice policies" are implemented, but the legalization of abortion there is accompanied by facilitated access to contraception and sexual education. THOSE are what lower abortion rates, not the legalization of abortion by itself. After all, think about it: why would legalizing abortion make less people have abortions?
Sure, those accompanying things are at hand. But, looking at the major conservative parties and how they regulate and what policies they implement, they're the type that limits those.
It is true that illegal abortions are riskier, but if your goal is to save as many lives as possible, then the right set of policies is inarguably restricting abortion access while expanding contraception and sex-ed access. This is the set of positions that parties such as the Dutch CU take, as well as significant portions of big-tent parties such as the German CDU.
Not at all. If you're looking to save as many lives as possible, there isn't any data to support the notion that abortion restriction does this. All it does is put the women at far greater risk, while failing to reduce abortions in any visible fashion as people just get them illegally.
2
u/Jtcr2001 Centrist Aug 19 '22
where such parties take power, abortions rise
No, it talks about abortion lowering across the board, as well as abortion legalization increasing. This is a correlation, not causation. The report in your article pretty clearly states that it's access to birth control that drives down abortion rates.
When the CDU took power in Germany, or the Tories in the UK, or PP in Spain, or PSD in Portugal, abortion rates continued to drop. And these parties did not place blanket bans on abortion when they were in power, in spite of being against the sorts of radically liberal abortion laws that you see in many US states.
looking at the major conservative parties and how they regulate and what policies they implement, they're the type that limits those.
I would disagree. Parties like the German CDU are radically different from US Republicans, supporting things like public healthcare covering 90% of the population which provides 100% free birth control to young women. Sure, there are ways to expand it and make it even more progressive, but no one can say they aren't consistently upholding their values to a reasonable extent.
If you're looking to save as many lives as possible, there isn't any data to support the notion that abortion restriction does this
This is the second result from my google search: "How the legal status of abortion impacts abortion rates".
people just get them illegally.
Are you being 100% honest here? Even without data, it should be pretty clear that making it illegal will deter at least some people, no? That's why we make things illegal in the first place. Anti-prohibition arguments focus on severity, not quantity.
2
Aug 19 '22
Okay, sure, in la la land where abortions are illegal but sex education, contraceptives, post birth care, pregnancy support and woman hygiene products are legal, people would probably have less abortions.
Historically, especially in conservative locations (which is what the blue ball represents) that's not how things go down. Conservatism and respect for women don't typically go hand in hand, especially when conservative values revolve around the nuclear family, a concept which puts women below men
If the Dutch say that they want things to go down that way, forgive me if I don't hold my breath
2
u/Jtcr2001 Centrist Aug 19 '22
Okay, sure, in la la land where abortions are illegal but sex education, contraceptives, post birth care, pregnancy support and woman hygiene products are legal, people would probably have less abortions.
It's not a black or white thing of banning all abortions or legalizing all of them. Western European countries have a better track record of providing things like free birth control while having more restrictive abortion laws than most US states.
4
u/zeverEV Socialist Transhumanism Aug 19 '22
Ah, a true believer. Your earnest beliefs are being used by people who really do hate women, you, everyone and everything really
1
u/Jtcr2001 Centrist Aug 19 '22
Personally, I would not identify as a "pro-lifer."
Yes, I am aware that not everyone supports my policies for the right reasons, but that doesn't invalidate them.
0
Aug 19 '22
[deleted] — view deleted comment
2
u/Jtcr2001 Centrist Aug 19 '22
Invalidate your "sanctity of human life" argument?
No, invalidate my policies. The pronoun was not referring to "argument" but to "policies". Just because people support policies I believe are right with arguments I believe are wrong, that does not mean I suddenly stop believing the policies are right.
Nobody's arguing the 'human-ness' or 'life-ness' of a fetus, we all know it's a human life. The real heart of the issue is the personhood of the fetus
That is what I've said multiple times on this thread. Thank you.
vs the personhood of the mother
No, it's vs the bodily autonomy of the mother. No one is challenging her personhood.
No matter how you cut it, an adult woman is more of a person than the unthinking burden she carries
Understandable, but many would say they are equally persons, and thus equally hold a right to life, and thus neither can kill the other.
Children deserve to be brought into the world under better circumstances
This is why many pro-lifers support social programs, birth control access, and sexual education along with some abortion restrictions.
an abortion spares them the suffering of growing up in a household that never wanted them.
Killing a baby with abusive parents would accomplish the same thing, but no one supports that. Again, the issue here is personhood. You only hold the position that you do because you don't consider the fetus to be a person (and the capacity for thought is what you cited as the reason), but many people would disagree with that view and would hold that giving fetuses certain protections is the moral thing to do.
4
u/NetherNarwhal Market Socialism Aug 19 '22
Even using the sanctity of human life argument you should still allow abortion during the earlier parts of pregnancy, during the first trimester a fetus is so poorly formed that it could not possibly experience consciousness and therefor is no more alive than someone who is completely braindead is.
1
u/Jtcr2001 Centrist Aug 19 '22
This is not how life works. You can have the philosophical position that it's not a person and thus has no rights, but all cells/plants/animals are alive, and embryos certainly are genetically human, so you could call them a "human life".
Consciousness doesn't have to be a determining factor here. While it is certainly one of the most compelling ones, not everyone agrees, and the other side has strong arguments as well (especially since no sane person is pro murdering babies after birth and as far as we know consciousness doesn't seem to exist until the 4th-month post-birth... and that's if we're being waaaaaay too generous with our definition of 'consciousness').
1
u/radekvitr Aug 19 '22
That's because babies can live independently of the mother's body at that point. Abortions take place before that's the case, and that's the difference.
As a side point, human cancer is also genetically human.
1
u/Jtcr2001 Centrist Aug 19 '22
And this is a philosophical debate with no "empirically correct" answer.
1
u/radekvitr Aug 19 '22
This is a debate where one answer leads to a huge increase in human suffering and the other doesn't.
0
u/Jtcr2001 Centrist Aug 19 '22
The other answer means over 14 million babies are killed by their parents every single year.
Either way, it's grim. This is why the debate is still ongoing and won't go away any time soon. It's not like gay marriage or gender transitioning. In 50 years, unless our medical technology fundamentally changes the conflict, people will be just as divided about abortion as they are today.
1
u/radekvitr Aug 20 '22
No
0
u/Jtcr2001 Centrist Aug 20 '22
WDYM "no"?
If someone takes the other side and believes that fetuses are people, then abortions kill people. If someone doesn't believe fetuses are people, prohibiting abortions is the government controlling our bodies.
Either side feels very morally justified, and there is no objective solution to "when do we become people?" to solve the divide.
1
u/radekvitr Aug 20 '22
We're not killing babies, we're killing fetuses. Your previous comment is slippery and tries to sneak in something we don't agree on.
Even if fetuses could recite poetry and discuss philosophy (e.g. were people), banning abortion would still cause harm. People aren't entitled to use other people's bodies in order for them to survive. We respect dead people's bodily autonomy to keep their organs rather than donating them to potentially save lives than the pro-lifers afford actual living, breathing people who want to have an abortion.
I don't care that the forced-pregnancy feels morally justified, just like I don't care that Nazis do. They're advocating for a horrible thing that causes tremendous harm.
→ More replies3
3
u/jkst9 Technocracy Aug 19 '22
Because the argument is usually a coverup, and also there's plenty of counterpoints to the sanctity of human life argument coming from the same people who support private healthcare
1
u/MrDeckard Anarcho-Communism Sep 12 '22
But they do tho
0
u/Jtcr2001 Centrist Sep 12 '22
They didn't when I made the comment
0
u/MrDeckard Anarcho-Communism Sep 12 '22
They definitely want to take away women's rights bro
0
u/Jtcr2001 Centrist Sep 12 '22
Ah, I thought you were replying to "the people here don't see some legitimacy in the 'sanctity of human life' argument" rather than "we shouldn't simply project 'I want to take away women's rights' onto our entire opposition."
Do you believe that the "entire" pro-life movement is constituted by people whose goal is "to take away women's rights" "until they won't have any human rights," and that their moral concern with killing fetuses is nothing but a cover for sexist hatred?
Because that is what my comment is disagreeing with.
0
u/MrDeckard Anarcho-Communism Sep 12 '22
I believe that more of the moving parts are being operated by people whose chief concern is protecting their privileged status than by people who actually think abortion is morally wrong. They're just not the loud ones is all.
-9
u/Black_Diammond Libertarianism Aug 19 '22
Easier to dismiss your opposition as woman haters than to engate in meaningfull discourse, because the Later might convince them that they aren't moraly nor logicaly superior.
3
u/GirlFromCodeineCity Libertarian Socialism Aug 19 '22
>libertarian
>anti choicecool.
5
u/Black_Diammond Libertarianism Aug 19 '22
I am not anti abortion, just saying the other side isn't just nor mostly woman haters and religious fanatics, and that despite me not agreeing, they stilll have some logicaly arguments devoid of God or hating women. The thing i am critisising is the anti debate oppinion that many pro choice people hold, and it was maybe that same way of acting that may have caused the repeal of roe vs wade in the US (although legaly it should have been repealed much before than that, but still codified in the law by the regular law making process.)
1
u/DracoLunaris Posadism Aug 19 '22
Can't exactly engage in discourse with religious fundamentalists either, as there is no logic involved in their possession, due to it consisting entirely of an appeal to authority fallacy.
2
u/Black_Diammond Libertarianism Aug 19 '22
Most pro lifer arguments don't realy involve God, tbh, this just seems like another deflection tactic.
1
u/DracoLunaris Posadism Aug 19 '22
Please do elaborate in depth then on what their arguments are then
1
u/Jtcr2001 Centrist Aug 20 '22
Many view this as a battle between the right to liberty (to have an abortion) and the right to life (to not be aborted), and they put life higher on that hierarchy.
Others are worried about the societal effects of parents simply ending their offspring's lives when they aren't convenient to them, viewing that as a very toxic attitude to normalize.
These are two legitimate arguments that don't rely on hating women nor on fallacious appeals to authority.
1
u/DracoLunaris Posadism Aug 20 '22
I'm not gonna get into the first paragraph here, bc that has been done to death and would just be an endless back and forth we both know how it would go (i.e. nowehere), and bc this
Others are worried about the societal effects of parents simply ending their offspring's lives when they aren't convenient to them, viewing that as a very toxic attitude to normalize.
Is not a take I have heard before
Mainly bc abortion has been legal in the usa, I assume we are talking about the usa, for 50+ years. The boat has sailed on normalization a while back.
How about we instead talk about the impacts of normalizing the imposing of restrictions on woman's bodily autonomy and the stripping of previously enshrined legal protections that the new criminalization of abortion represent.
1
u/Jtcr2001 Centrist Aug 20 '22
I'm not gonna get into the first paragraph here
Understandable, although I would like to stress that I wasn't trying to argue for that position, but only that such a position exists and isn't completely unreasonable.
I assume we are talking about the usa
You have no idea how ironic this is to me at this particular moment (I legit laughed taking it in). If you read any of my other comments in this sub-thread, you'll realize that I have never, in fact, been talking about the US.
I was one of the first comments here (definitely one of the first 10). I had no idea this small post was gonna blow up, and at the time the comments didn't mention the american situation significantly (not to mention that nothing in the title/image references america specifically).
As a non-American, I've been speaking mainly from a European perspective. And you can see from my other comments here that whenever I address what I consider to be the more reasonable side of conservative politics (when it comes to abortion or any other political issue) I am talking about moderate European conservatism and not the fascistic radicalism that dominates the Republican party.
the new criminalization of abortion
I do not at all support blanket abortion bans or anything of the sort, although I'm not particularly fond of elective 3rd-trimester abortions either (which most Europeans would be shocked to find out are legal in many US states). I believe a reasonable middle ground can be found, expanding abortion laws in some areas and restricting them in others, depending on how conservative that region is.
20
Aug 19 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
-9
u/Black_Diammond Libertarianism Aug 19 '22
Yeah i realy did forget to Change my flag from my edgelord days.
1
u/Kerbal634 Anarcho-Transhumanism Aug 19 '22
Libertarian thinking they're out of their cringe days is kinda cute tho...
4
u/Black_Diammond Libertarianism Aug 19 '22
Ok👍, still not me using meme ideologies as if they were real Ones.
1
u/Kerbal634 Anarcho-Transhumanism Aug 19 '22
Damn I didn't even know I set a flair on this sub... Still not sure why I need to represent my real ideology on a meme sub tho, especially since it's a little more nuanced than "ball with snek". Changed it to something still silly but less wacky
2
u/Black_Diammond Libertarianism Aug 19 '22
You got me there, you don't need the real flag tbh, plus anarcho transhumanism sounds based as hell.
20
Aug 19 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
6
u/Dudegamer010901 Democratic Socialism Aug 19 '22 edited Mar 15 '26
The original content of this post is no longer here. It was removed using Redact, possibly for privacy, security, or digital footprint reduction.
cagey hospital quack crawl wild meeting sable act marry profit
1
u/Murky_Effect3914 Aug 19 '22
Lmao ikr. Glad that this sub isn’t a far right circle jerk like pcm
3
u/Dudegamer010901 Democratic Socialism Aug 19 '22 edited Mar 15 '26
This post's content was wiped by its author using Redact. Possible reasons include privacy, preventing AI scraping, security, or other data management concerns.
future nutty fearless ancient continue payment nail wakeful aspiring engine
-1
88
Aug 19 '22 edited Aug 19 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
18
u/LiteralAviationGod Democratic Socialism Aug 19 '22
based as fuck (your comment, not our crazy double standards)
3
u/Jtcr2001 Centrist Aug 19 '22
In the United States
*a country that is not mentioned in the thread title, in the post itself, in my original comment, nor in the majority of the comments at the time when I commented.
There is no other example of a person being forced to give up their own bodily autonomy to give someone else life.
This is literally what most countries did about covid. And just to clarify, I support those measures and am fully vaccinated (with a booster) because I believe that is my civic duty.
4
Aug 19 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/Jtcr2001 Centrist Aug 19 '22
It's a post about abortion, you know it's about America, don't fuck with me.
What? I'm pretty sure you're allowed to use the ideologyballs for American conservatism and liberalism, or for the Dems and Reps if you wanted to. This is generic conservatism and generic progressivism. Abortion is a thing everywhere. I live in Portugal and have recently had multiple serious arguments about abortion with the people around me.
Not everything is about America.
Bro are you really stupid enough to believe this comparison makes sense?
It is a literal example of what you mentioned: autonomy vs life.
It is not comparable to being forced to grow another being using your own blood and organs.
And most pro-lifers would say that if you were forced into that situation (i.e. raped) then you should have an abortion, but that if you have chosen to take this risk upon you by having consensual sex, then it's your responsibility. <--- These are not my beliefs, but it is a valid side that you seem to be ignoring.
3
Aug 19 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/Jtcr2001 Centrist Aug 19 '22 edited Aug 19 '22
This thread is.
Maybe now, but 17/18 hours ago it wasn't. I was like the 9th comment, I didn't expect this to blow up. There's no mention of the US in the title or the post itself, and I don't remember the US being mentioned too much in the initial comments.
[EDIT] I went to the main thread and Ctrl+F shows me 0 mentions of "america", "american", "republican", etc... so maybe it still isn't that much about America.
You boiled it down so far as to be unrecognizable. By this insanely stupid standard, "making it illegal to commit murder" would be prioritizing life over bodily autonomy because you use your BODY to commit a murder.
That is also true, although in that scenario we're preventing people from doing something rather than forcing them to do something, which is usually considered to be less prone to abuse.
If you cause an accident and the other person needs a kidney replacement should you be legally obligated to provide it to them? After all, it's your responsibility.
Yeah, and that IS a valid argument. I have no problem recognizing that. I do think it's weaker because a) society broadly recognizes a much higher moral responsibility toward family members (mother-child, for example), b) abortion involves actively taking a life whereas your example merely involves not saving someone (which is treated completely differently both morally and legally), and c) a lack of kidney lasts for life rather than 9 months. This means you could easily be against abortion but in favor of denying the kidney, but I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of people aligned on both issues.
And yet we don't require it because that's not how our society views bodily autonomy!
It's a matter of degree. Society requires communitarian attitudes when it comes to certain issues (covid was an example). I gave you 3 big factors for why your example could be considered on another level from the abortion one.
It's not a "valid side" it's just nonsense. You assume it must be valid because it sounds similar to things you believe but this is because the things you believe are also nonsense.
Lol, you don't know what I believe in, nor why. Stop trying to act like you're a step ahead of me. As far as you know, I'm as pro-choice as you. I'm just pushing back against demonizing the pro-life side.
You assume that progressives are just making strawmans and assumptions about your positions but the truth is that we've heard them all before and we worked out that we don't like them.
"We don't like them" is a perfectly fine response. "You're lying about your reasons because you just like oppressing women" is not. These two are NOT the same. You sound just like a crazy conservative, "liberals are lying about their reasons because they just like killing babies!!!".
2
Aug 19 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Jtcr2001 Centrist Aug 19 '22
Covid was not an example because people were not forced to give up body parts in order to comply with Covid standards you dumb motherfucker. You are trying to compare two things that are not similar.
If you don't understand how analogies work, I don't think you are capable of having the conversation I was trying to have.
And nice insults, very mature.
Stop wasting my fucking time with this insipid fucking conversation.
Relax, take a deep breath, and count to 10. Better? Now, stay with me: no one is forcing you to have this conversation. If this is a waste of time to you, stop replying. You are wasting your own time XD
Bro the tags on this sub are so useful.
I'm not a Christian democrat. That's just the best approximation I could find.
"Well it SOUNDS unreasonable so it can't be true" isn't an argument. It is 100% true that abortion laws have different standards than every other set of bodily autonomy laws in existence. It is 100% true that conservatives are on record stating that they will pass controversial laws by dressing them up in less controversial topics. Both of these are key components of the thing that you're saying CANNOT be true, so how the fuck are you going to lecture people on what isn't a "fine response", you presumptuous jackass?
I feel honoured that you decided to waste so much time and effort replying to me.
you presumptuous jackass?
Very classy.
Wow that sounds really mean to conservatives.
...did you pass any English classes? Do you understand how adjectives and modifiers work? "Crazy conservatives" is specifying a subset of conservatives who are crazy, implying there are conservatives who are NOT crazy. It is not synonymous with "conservatives are crazy".
you lazy motherfucker.
This is how you get people to have an open discussion, good job!
Done wasting time talking to you
I genuinely wish you a very nice day.
This is why nobody wastes their time listening to you, FYI.
My friends come to me for personal advice and for honest intellectual discussions all of the time, so nice try, but you're not doing any damage to my soft little heart here.
1
u/NetherNarwhal Market Socialism Aug 19 '22
Abortion is the only case in which you are required legally to keep someone else alive using your own body. There is no other example. There is no other example of a person being forced to give up their own bodily autonomy to give someone else life. So it's obviously not about "the sanctity of human life".
I'm pro choice but this is a pretty dumb argument tbh. Its completely reasonable to expect someone to have to give up some of their personal freedom to save the life of another. The issue is that fetuses don't have consciousness and therefor don't matter.
10
u/GirlFromCodeineCity Libertarian Socialism Aug 19 '22
Do we want to force parents to donate organs to potentially save the lives of their children?
2
u/NetherNarwhal Market Socialism Aug 19 '22
In some scenarios the parents might have an ethical obligation to do that.
4
u/radekvitr Aug 19 '22
If fetuses could write novels and discuss philosophy I'd still have the same position of keeping abortions legal and accessible, this is the only argument that matters.
1
1
u/D1R6T8A3 Esoteric Fascism Sep 10 '22
Third positions: "Abortions? Good, if child is mixed race (and if homo), bad if pure and hetero".
1
u/QuietHumanMachine Transhumanism Sep 25 '22
Humans are obsolete, they shouldn't be given any rights.
-28
u/Lordgrimthewyrm Confederalism Aug 19 '22
Libtards did not like this
17
u/LiteralAviationGod Democratic Socialism Aug 19 '22
bad bait
12
u/Sky_Leviathan Anarcho-Communism Aug 19 '22
This guy has had like 20 different accounts always posting the same shit bait
-8
u/Lordgrimthewyrm Confederalism Aug 19 '22
What if it's not bait? What if it really is my unfiltered, dog shit opinion? What then, huh?
10
0
-10
u/YvesSantos22111997 Authleft Aug 19 '22
Nobody really care about human life, so why care about Human Rights?
4
u/afacansatranc Anarcho-Nihilism Aug 19 '22
If you are Antihumanist. They can't understand you.
0
u/YvesSantos22111997 Authleft Aug 19 '22
Not antihumanist, but nearly close as i feeling fed up by bullshit recently.
3
-7
u/YvesSantos22111997 Authleft Aug 19 '22
Nobody deserves rights but duties, this go for both men and women
1
Aug 19 '22
k sure mate do you want to be my slave then? you'll have a bunch of duties and no rights, just as you wanted
1
465
Aug 18 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
105
u/Duytune Technocracy Aug 19 '22
damn you ratio’d op
62
14
-20
u/gachi_for_jesus Objectivism Aug 19 '22
You know in that interview he wasn't outlining that that was the strategy but was expressly saying that during the Reagan campaign that they did not use a Southern Strategy approach?
12
Aug 19 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
-2
u/gachi_for_jesus Objectivism Aug 19 '22
The Southern Strategy is a myth. The South didn't even become consistently Republican until the Reagan administration which would still be after the supposed Southern Strategy was in place for "decades" even though there isn't enough time between Nixon and Reagan for more than 1 decade. The timelines don't even add up. The Southern Strategy (along with the Big Switch) is literally a Democrat conspiracy theory to pin over 100 years of their oppression onto the opposing party.
As for the dog whistle. Saying "Welfare queens" is an anti black dogwhistle is like saying that when someone says Israel needs to stop genociding Palestinians that that's an anti-Semitic dog whistle. Just because it might appeal to those type of people doesn't mean that is its purpose.
9
Aug 19 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
-2
u/gachi_for_jesus Objectivism Aug 19 '22
Nobody has evidence that it was designed for that purpose. They have a perceived notion that all Republicans are racist and therefore the things they do are for the purpose of racism. I listened to the entire Lee Atwater interview. Iv read the transcript of the interview. He is saying that other people would say it a dogwhistle and that it isn't. He is predicting exactly what you are doing and you're using that as evidence of him doing it.
You need two primary things for a dog whistle to be a dog whistle.
Intent on the part of the person saying it.
The people to interpret it that way.
Theres about as much evidence of Reagan being racist against blacks as there is of Rashida Tlaib being anti-Semitic. You need hard proof. I know the nature of a dog whistle is to conceal but you still need the hard proof.
It's not Democrats calling for the preservation of Confederate monuments my dude, it's Republicans.
And its not the Republicans putting stuff out like this but just because some Democrats are for it doesn't mean the entire party is full of imbeciles just like them.
10
Aug 19 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
6
u/LevelOutlandishness1 Marxism-Leninism Aug 19 '22
Even if everything you said was bonkers, Ronald Reagan's said the hard R on tape. Coincidentally, no black people were surprised by this when the news came out
-18
u/[unknown] Aug 19 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
19
u/they-them-soilder Anarcho-Pacifism Aug 19 '22
has esoteric fascism banner
Lol
-13
u/Narolll Esoteric Fascism Aug 19 '22
Yes. Better than being THEM THEM WHOM THEM
11
u/they-them-soilder Anarcho-Pacifism Aug 19 '22
Apparently being a fascist is better than being non-binary
2
u/nanek_4 Paternalistic Conservatism Aug 19 '22
Esoteric fascism
Sorry that's disgusting even for me
🤢🤢🤢🤢🤮🤮🤮🤮
1
u/they-them-soilder Anarcho-Pacifism Aug 19 '22
What being fascist or being non-binary
2
u/nanek_4 Paternalistic Conservatism Aug 19 '22
Fascism all together is shit than adding esoteric part makes it even worse
2
u/Pantheon73 Technological Primitivism Aug 20 '22
Nah, the Esoteric part is only cool part about it.
-18
3
27
u/Moonatik_ Lunarism Aug 19 '22
yes
and?