Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Wikipedia)   Happy Birthday, Roe v. Wade. Okay, let me rephrase that. Today marks the 41st anniversary of the landmark Roe v. Wade decision   (en.wikipedia.org ) divider line
    More: Interesting, Happy Birthday, U.S. Supreme Court, United States, adjudications, strict scrutiny, maternal health, Fourteenth Amendment, abortion law  
•       •       •

1271 clicks; posted to Main » on 22 Jan 2014 at 5:35 PM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



452 Comments   (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-01-22 06:27:28 PM  

Callous: Schiavo, I don't know enough about brain death to have an opinion, that whole case was a cluster-fark that I didn't follow closely. If the patient is clinically dead and their body is being kept functioning by machines I don't see the problem with with organ donation. If their heart is beating on it's own how can they be brain dead? The brain controls the heart. Can someone have functioning organs and be brain dead?


Yes. I think you're confusing "brain death" (the media's term for cerebral death) with brain stem death.
 
2014-01-22 06:27:45 PM  

Al!: As a man who recently conceived a child intentionally with a woman who wanted to have my baby, who then dumped me and aborted my child: Fark you RvW, and Fark everyone who says a man should have no say in the matter.


And fark you, Sir, as a man who thinks that women have the basic human right to not be forced to be an incubating meatsack for a fetus.
 
2014-01-22 06:29:02 PM  
Roe vs. Wade gets a birthday.  55 million Amerikans don't.  Most of them minority.  Remind me which party is racist?
 
2014-01-22 06:29:39 PM  

cretinbob: Row versus wade? I prefer motorboating


Nice.
 
2014-01-22 06:29:50 PM  

hardinparamedic: Callous: If their heart is beating on it's own how can they be brain dead?  The brain controls the heart.  Can someone have functioning organs and be brain dead?

The heart does not require the brain to function - in fact, it can function completely independently of a brain for a good deal of time, relying on the autonomic nervous system and spinal reflexes to regulate it's rate, or even just hormones in the body - such as ach and epinepherine.

The fact someone's heart is beating doesn't mean they are "alive" as we as a society define human life. It just means the sack of meat supporting a brain is still functioning.


As I just said, but you decline to mention the brain stem which is the necessary part of your autonomic nervous system that maintains the involuntary muscle functions in the body.
 
2014-01-22 06:30:54 PM  

hardinparamedic: Callous: If their heart is beating on it's own how can they be brain dead?  The brain controls the heart.  Can someone have functioning organs and be brain dead?

The heart does not require the brain to function - in fact, it can function completely independently of a brain for a good deal of time, relying on the autonomic nervous system and spinal reflexes to regulate it's rate, or even just hormones in the body - such as ach and epinepherine.

The fact someone's heart is beating doesn't mean they are "alive" as we as a society define human life. It just means the sack of meat supporting a brain is still functioning.


Well than I would say they are dead and organ donation is the best outcome for all involved.  Dead person's wishes, or family's wishes if dead person's wishes are unknown, considered obviously.

If there is no brain activity it's dead, and the person is dead.
 
2014-01-22 06:30:57 PM  

Mean Daddy: Roe vs. Wade gets a birthday.  55 million Amerikans don't.  Most of them minority.  Remind me which party is racist?


The one that doesn't want to support all those fatherless minority babies.
 
2014-01-22 06:31:27 PM  

Al!: As a man who recently conceived a child intentionally with a woman who wanted to have my baby, who then dumped me and aborted my child: Fark you RvW, and Fark everyone who says a man should have no say in the matter.


Men shouldn't have a choice in whether or not the woman aborts. They should have the choice to abort their parental rights and responsibilities though.
 
2014-01-22 06:32:06 PM  

InterruptingQuirk: As I just said, but you decline to mention the brain stem which is the necessary part of your autonomic nervous system that maintains the involuntary muscle functions in the body.


Many people in the right to die camp would argue that keeping someone with only the functions of the pons, midbrain, and medulla intact is cruel and unusual, and most people who support the right to self-determination would point out that keeping people like that alive against their documented wishes is a violation of their basic human rights.

The "Pro-Life" crowd's behavior is the reason that I have a living will and advanced directives at 28 years old and POAs designated that I know will carry out my wishes.
 
2014-01-22 06:33:49 PM  

genner: TheShavingofOccam123: genner: Either it's murder or it's not. Choice shouldn't be the issue.

Either it's only the woman's business or it's not. Political power to subject citizens to the whims of the majority shouldn't be the issue.

If it is murder it's the states business. If it's not it's not. So why do people pretend the argument is about something else?


Why do you pretend that one of the major social debates of our time is only about one thing just because you say, without offering any substantiation, that it is?
 
2014-01-22 06:34:35 PM  

hardinparamedic: InterruptingQuirk: As I just said, but you decline to mention the brain stem which is the necessary part of your autonomic nervous system that maintains the involuntary muscle functions in the body.

Many people in the right to die camp would argue that keeping someone with only the functions of the pons, midbrain, and medulla intact is cruel and unusual, and most people who support the right to self-determination would point out that keeping people like that alive against their documented wishes is a violation of their basic human rights.

The "Pro-Life" crowd's behavior is the reason that I have a living will and advanced directives at 28 years old and POAs designated that I know will carry out my wishes.



Did you include "If I become a zombie, shoot me in the head"?
 
2014-01-22 06:34:37 PM  
Whew, I just turned 43.. MADE IT!
 
2014-01-22 06:34:47 PM  

jso2897: genner: TheShavingofOccam123: genner: Either it's murder or it's not. Choice shouldn't be the issue.

Either it's only the woman's business or it's not. Political power to subject citizens to the whims of the majority shouldn't be the issue.

If it is murder it's the states business. If it's not it's not. So why do people pretend the argument is about something else?

Why do you pretend that one of the major social debates of our time is only about one thing just because you say, without offering any substantiation, that it is?


Because exploring the details of a complex sociopolitical issue would go against his simple one-liner talking point.
 
2014-01-22 06:35:20 PM  

umad: Al!: As a man who recently conceived a child intentionally with a woman who wanted to have my baby, who then dumped me and aborted my child: Fark you RvW, and Fark everyone who says a man should have no say in the matter.

Men shouldn't have a choice in whether or not the woman aborts. They should have the choice to abort their parental rights and responsibilities though.


If it's the man's kid, it's his kid. They now have parental responsibilities whether they want them or not.
 
2014-01-22 06:37:37 PM  

Phinn: Women don't go around randomly amputating various cells from their body for no reason.


They do, however, remove various cells for reasons.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liposuction

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breast_reduction

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mole_removal#Mole_removal

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancer_surgery
 
2014-01-22 06:38:07 PM  
Yep. Abortion's legal, and it'll continue to be legal. The sooner we move to decanting our young in vials, the sooner this bullshiat debate will go away.
 
2014-01-22 06:38:08 PM  

EbolaNYC: Whew, I just turned 43.. MADE IT!


I'm 40.  I know my mother wanted me; you will always have to wonder...

;P
 
2014-01-22 06:38:20 PM  

Wadded Beef: umad: Al!: As a man who recently conceived a child intentionally with a woman who wanted to have my baby, who then dumped me and aborted my child: Fark you RvW, and Fark everyone who says a man should have no say in the matter.

Men shouldn't have a choice in whether or not the woman aborts. They should have the choice to abort their parental rights and responsibilities though.

If it's the man's kid, it's his kid. They now have parental responsibilities whether they want them or not.


If women can terminate their responsibilites then men should be able to as well. If men can't, then neither should women. I don't care either way, as long as it is equal.
 
2014-01-22 06:38:50 PM  

jso2897: genner: TheShavingofOccam123: genner: Either it's murder or it's not. Choice shouldn't be the issue.

Either it's only the woman's business or it's not. Political power to subject citizens to the whims of the majority shouldn't be the issue.

If it is murder it's the states business. If it's not it's not. So why do people pretend the argument is about something else?

Why do you pretend that one of the major social debates of our time is only about one thing just because you say, without offering any substantiation, that it is?


Why do you say it's more than one thing without offering any proof yourself?
I can point to my one thing.

->  Is abortion murder?

If you can bring up  a second talking point where it doesn't matter if abortion is murder or not then I'll listen.
 
2014-01-22 06:39:32 PM  

genner: Is abortion murder?


Please list the United States Public Law or State Law which defines lawful abortion as murder.

Go ahead, I'll wait.
 
2014-01-22 06:39:51 PM  

Al!: As a man who recently conceived a child intentionally with a woman who wanted to have my baby, who then dumped me and aborted my child: Fark you RvW, and Fark everyone who says a man should have no say in the matter.


She divorced you and still had time to get an abortion?
 
2014-01-22 06:39:55 PM  
Casey v. Planned Parenthood!!! FFS. "Area man has strong opinion on what he believes the Constitution says."
 
2014-01-22 06:40:11 PM  

Wadded Beef: umad: Al!: As a man who recently conceived a child intentionally with a woman who wanted to have my baby, who then dumped me and aborted my child: Fark you RvW, and Fark everyone who says a man should have no say in the matter.

Men shouldn't have a choice in whether or not the woman aborts. They should have the choice to abort their parental rights and responsibilities though.

If it's the man's kid, it's his kid. They now have parental responsibilities whether they want them or not.


I'm scared of my own question here, but if a woman can abort those responsibilities, why can't a man?
 
2014-01-22 06:40:11 PM  

genner: jso2897: genner: TheShavingofOccam123: genner: Either it's murder or it's not. Choice shouldn't be the issue.

Either it's only the woman's business or it's not. Political power to subject citizens to the whims of the majority shouldn't be the issue.

If it is murder it's the states business. If it's not it's not. So why do people pretend the argument is about something else?

Why do you pretend that one of the major social debates of our time is only about one thing just because you say, without offering any substantiation, that it is?

Why do you say it's more than one thing without offering any proof yourself?
I can point to my one thing.

->  Is abortion murder?

If you can bring up  a second talking point where it doesn't matter if abortion is murder or not then I'll listen.


Abortion isn't murder.  Debate over.
 
2014-01-22 06:40:25 PM  

the_vegetarian_cannibal: jso2897: genner: TheShavingofOccam123: genner: Either it's murder or it's not. Choice shouldn't be the issue.

Either it's only the woman's business or it's not. Political power to subject citizens to the whims of the majority shouldn't be the issue.

If it is murder it's the states business. If it's not it's not. So why do people pretend the argument is about something else?

Why do you pretend that one of the major social debates of our time is only about one thing just because you say, without offering any substantiation, that it is?

Because exploring the details of a complex sociopolitical issue would go against his simple one-liner talking point.


If you look at 99% of posts in abortion threads on any forum it's one liners.

It's about privacy
It's about murder
It's just a clump of cells
It's a living human being

In reality it's a VERY complex sociological issue because different people give different weights to the various aspects of it.  Some believe that a woman's right to privacy trumps all the others.  Some believe that the baby's right to live trumps all others, etc.

It's never really going to be resolved because of that.
 
2014-01-22 06:42:54 PM  
www.nationalblackprolifeunion.comsaynsumthn.files.wordpress.com
 
2014-01-22 06:43:49 PM  

hardinparamedic: genner: Is abortion murder?

Please list the United States Public Law or State Law which defines lawful abortion as murder.

Go ahead, I'll wait.


Word games are fun.
There's this thing called the vernacular it defines murder as the taking of a human life without just cause.

Laws can be changed and that's exactly what people are trying to do in this situation.
 
2014-01-22 06:44:09 PM  

Death Whisper: [www.nationalblackprolifeunion.com image 352x356][saynsumthn.files.wordpress.com image 636x477]


Hitler championed universal healthcare.

Thus all countries with Universal Healthcare are practicing the holocaust today.
 
2014-01-22 06:44:15 PM  

Death Whisper: [www.nationalblackprolifeunion.com image 352x356][saynsumthn.files.wordpress.com image 636x477]


But I thought your kind wanted them all dead...
 
2014-01-22 06:45:19 PM  

genner: There's this thing called the vernacular it defines murder as the taking of a human life without just cause.


The just cause is whatever that woman says it is, below the age of awareness and viability.

Your personal discomfort with that fact is not legal jurisdiction to control the bodies of others. Sorry. Not yours.
 
2014-01-22 06:45:21 PM  

umad: Wadded Beef: umad: Al!: As a man who recently conceived a child intentionally with a woman who wanted to have my baby, who then dumped me and aborted my child: Fark you RvW, and Fark everyone who says a man should have no say in the matter.

Men shouldn't have a choice in whether or not the woman aborts. They should have the choice to abort their parental rights and responsibilities though.

If it's the man's kid, it's his kid. They now have parental responsibilities whether they want them or not.

If women can terminate their responsibilites then men should be able to as well. If men can't, then neither should women. I don't care either way, as long as it is equal.


But it's not equal. It's only the women who are forced to carry the meatsacks and should of course have the choice whether to keep it.

As for men, if you've impregnated somebody, guess what: you've already made the choice available to you and that is you unzipped your pants. And you've made the de facto acceptance to the consequences. If she chooses to keep it you're on the hook.

Party responsibly.
 
2014-01-22 06:45:45 PM  

genner: jso2897: genner: TheShavingofOccam123: genner: Either it's murder or it's not. Choice shouldn't be the issue.

Either it's only the woman's business or it's not. Political power to subject citizens to the whims of the majority shouldn't be the issue.

If it is murder it's the states business. If it's not it's not. So why do people pretend the argument is about something else?

Why do you pretend that one of the major social debates of our time is only about one thing just because you say, without offering any substantiation, that it is?

Why do you say it's more than one thing without offering any proof yourself?
I can point to my one thing.

->  Is abortion murder?

If you can bring up  a second talking point where it doesn't matter if abortion is murder or not then I'll listen.


First of all, what constitutes a relevant issue is a matter of opinion - neither of us can "prove" his case. There are plenty of issues, however, that many very real people who don't happen to be you consider relevant.
Is abortion Murder?
To whom, if anyone, does a fetus "belong"?
Does the State's interest extend to the interior of a woman's body?
Is Roe vs Wade a narrow ruling, applying only to reproductive rights, or a broader one relating to privacy issues in general?
Can a person be forced to serve as an icubator for another life against their will?
What role should fathers have in the decision to have or not have an abortion?
I could list more - but of course, there is nothing I can do to keep you from waving your magic wand and declaring them all non-issues. so there wouldn't be much point.
 
2014-01-22 06:46:09 PM  
Enjoy your child sacrifice, Americans. 55 million, eh? You people care too much about high scores.
 
2014-01-22 06:46:12 PM  

That Guy Jeff: FlashHarry: here's to 4+ decades of empowering progressive women and enraging conservative men.

I'm strictly "pro-choice". But I also despise this inability of people to correctly frame their opponent's arguments and their persistence in misrepresenting their "enemies" motives for their own sides gain.

The conservative dislike of abortion has absolutely nothing to do with women. They believe that abortion is killing a human being. They believe it is morally wrong to kill another human being, at least, one that hasn't themselves killed someone. And that's it. That's the sum and the total of their argument. All this "war against women" garbage might make for good fundraising and mobilization and help to get people riled up, but it also makes YOU every bit as sleazy as any other sleazy manipulative liar engaged in the fight. It's every bit as underhanded and disingenuous to say "liberals want to murder babies" as it is to say "conservatives want to control women". That simply isn't either sides motivation.

Here, in case this needs explicit spelling out: One side believes abortion is killing a human being. The other side believes prohibiting abortion unjustly limits the ability of women to control their own bodies. That's it. That's the entirety of the "debate". We would be a lot farther along in a lot more issues if people would stop making up the other side's motivations to capitalize on divisiveness.


THIS!!!!

The pro-choice/pro-abortion movement loves to frame their opponents as just being the opposite of them.  If they believe that abortion is a woman's right, then obviously anyone who opposes them is against women's rights, right?  No.

If the anti-abortion/pro-life movement believes that abortion is the murder of unborn babies, then obviously anyone who disagrees is in favor murdering babies, right?  Again. No.

It is, however,  much easier to battle strawmen than it is actual positions.  I think this is why the debate gets framed the way it does by factions on both sides.

FWIW, I believe abortion should be legal and free of government intrusion for a different set of reasons, primarily centering around concepts of self-ownership and not just the right of one gender to have some control over a small subset of their body's functions.

Even if we were to discover that abortion of a fetus really is the same as murdering a baby, I would still be pro choice on the grounds that a woman (like all human beings) has ownership of her own body and things inside of it and that her right to discontinue carrying a baby/fetus supercedes the right of that baby/fetus to live.  It's not a pretty, easy to swallow position, nor is it one that occupies any moral high ground, but I do believe it's principled and consistent with actual concepts of liberty and self-determination.  My belief in self-ownership goes beyond the right to terminate a pregnancy and well into areas (to name a few) like sexual practices, consumption of intoxicants (or poisons depending on who you talk to), consumption of food prepared/packaged in a manner viewed as inadvisable by others, etc.
 
2014-01-22 06:46:34 PM  
Considering I like to flaunt opinions on things that are none of my business, how does this sound?

Given the axiom (idiom?) "No Harm, No foul" perhaps abortions should be a simple matter right up until the fetus can feel pain (about 20 weeks from what I've read) after which abortions should need some sort of medical justification (sans which, if you still don't want the child, it goes up for adoption). That gives the woman five months to make up her mind & also protects the fetus from a painful end (to some degree at least).

Which is it? Potato or Nobel prize? Expensive potato soup maybe? I'd take soup, it's cold out.
 
2014-01-22 06:47:29 PM  
geez..,  liveactionnews.org
wp.patheos.com.s3.amazonaws.com
 
2014-01-22 06:47:34 PM  

Callous: the_vegetarian_cannibal: jso2897: genner: TheShavingofOccam123: genner: Either it's murder or it's not. Choice shouldn't be the issue.

Either it's only the woman's business or it's not. Political power to subject citizens to the whims of the majority shouldn't be the issue.

If it is murder it's the states business. If it's not it's not. So why do people pretend the argument is about something else?

Why do you pretend that one of the major social debates of our time is only about one thing just because you say, without offering any substantiation, that it is?

Because exploring the details of a complex sociopolitical issue would go against his simple one-liner talking point.

If you look at 99% of posts in abortion threads on any forum it's one liners.

It's about privacy
It's about murder
It's just a clump of cells
It's a living human being

In reality it's a VERY complex sociological issue because different people give different weights to the various aspects of it.  Some believe that a woman's right to privacy trumps all the others.  Some believe that the baby's right to live trumps all others, etc.

It's never really going to be resolved because of that.


Yeah, except one side has attempted to be practical about the matter and tried to reduce the number of abortions while simultaneously still supporting its legality. This side has supported funding for access to various forms of contraception and teaching comprehensive sex ed to try to limit the necessity of women have to get abortions.

The other side said "NO!" and opposed contraceptives and sex-ed while still also opposing abortion (the inevitable social consequence when the first two things are not applied). They want to have their cake and eat it too.
 
2014-01-22 06:47:45 PM  
More than half of women who get an abortion already have at least one child.
 
2014-01-22 06:48:12 PM  

hardinparamedic: genner: There's this thing called the vernacular it defines murder as the taking of a human life without just cause.

The just cause is whatever that woman says it is, below the age of awareness and viability.

Your personal discomfort with that fact is not legal jurisdiction to control the bodies of others. Sorry. Not yours.


Your right to swing your fist ends where my face begins. If the government can tell me not to beat someone to death with my own fists why can't they tell a woman not to kill a baby with her body?
 
2014-01-22 06:49:50 PM  

genner: Your right to swing your fist ends where my face begins. If the government can tell me not to beat someone to death with my own fists why can't they tell a woman not to kill a baby with her body?


Because an embryo and a fetus are not a baby, in any world except your own personal opinion.
 
2014-01-22 06:50:48 PM  

genner: hardinparamedic: genner: There's this thing called the vernacular it defines murder as the taking of a human life without just cause.

The just cause is whatever that woman says it is, below the age of awareness and viability.

Your personal discomfort with that fact is not legal jurisdiction to control the bodies of others. Sorry. Not yours.

Your right to swing your fist ends where my face begins. If the government can tell me not to beat someone to death with my own fists why can't they tell a woman not to kill a baby with her body?


What are you going to do? Arrest the pregnant teenager for murder and lock her up for life?
 
2014-01-22 06:50:57 PM  
If people really wanted to stop abortion, they'd focus on advancements in artificial wombs. If you could just suck the thing out and let it gestate in a tube, I don't think it would be a big deal if abortions were outlawed. Of course if every abortion now leads to a new kid being born, you would need massive infrastructure projects and social policies to ensure that these tube babies have a decent shot at life instead of wasting away inside Dickensian orphanages.

So you can have your pro-life utopia, but somebody's going to have to pay for it.
 
2014-01-22 06:51:00 PM  

genner: hardinparamedic: genner: There's this thing called the vernacular it defines murder as the taking of a human life without just cause.

The just cause is whatever that woman says it is, below the age of awareness and viability.

Your personal discomfort with that fact is not legal jurisdiction to control the bodies of others. Sorry. Not yours.

Your right to swing your fist ends where my face begins.


Correct. At that point, my right to swing my arms about becomes my right to punch you in the mouth - and by extension, your right to be punched in the mouth by me.
 
2014-01-22 06:52:34 PM  

Wadded Beef: umad: Wadded Beef: umad: Al!: As a man who recently conceived a child intentionally with a woman who wanted to have my baby, who then dumped me and aborted my child: Fark you RvW, and Fark everyone who says a man should have no say in the matter.

Men shouldn't have a choice in whether or not the woman aborts. They should have the choice to abort their parental rights and responsibilities though.

If it's the man's kid, it's his kid. They now have parental responsibilities whether they want them or not.

If women can terminate their responsibilites then men should be able to as well. If men can't, then neither should women. I don't care either way, as long as it is equal.

But it's not equal. It's only the women who are forced to carry the meatsacks and should of course have the choice whether to keep it.

As for men, if you've impregnated somebody, guess what: you've already made the choice available to you and that is you unzipped your pants. And you've made the de facto acceptance to the consequences. If she chooses to keep it you're on the hook.

Party responsibly.


That's an unequal sharing of the responsibility. They both unzipped their pants as you put it. And yet she gets a followup opportunity to discard the responsibility, while he does not because as you say, he made his choice(the only one he gets)same as she did, but that's it for him.
 
2014-01-22 06:54:30 PM  

InterruptingQuirk: They both unzipped their pants as you put it. And yet she gets a followup opportunity to discard the responsibility, while he does not because as you say, he made his choice(the only one he gets)same as she did, but that's it for him.


Now that is some straight up thinking.  I mean, wow.  Brain power in action here!  Hope you guys are watching and learning!
 
2014-01-22 06:54:45 PM  

the_vegetarian_cannibal: Callous: the_vegetarian_cannibal: jso2897: genner: TheShavingofOccam123: genner: Either it's murder or it's not. Choice shouldn't be the issue.

Either it's only the woman's business or it's not. Political power to subject citizens to the whims of the majority shouldn't be the issue.

If it is murder it's the states business. If it's not it's not. So why do people pretend the argument is about something else?

Why do you pretend that one of the major social debates of our time is only about one thing just because you say, without offering any substantiation, that it is?

Because exploring the details of a complex sociopolitical issue would go against his simple one-liner talking point.

If you look at 99% of posts in abortion threads on any forum it's one liners.

It's about privacy
It's about murder
It's just a clump of cells
It's a living human being

In reality it's a VERY complex sociological issue because different people give different weights to the various aspects of it.  Some believe that a woman's right to privacy trumps all the others.  Some believe that the baby's right to live trumps all others, etc.

It's never really going to be resolved because of that.

Yeah, except one side has attempted to be practical about the matter and tried to reduce the number of abortions while simultaneously still supporting its legality. This side has supported funding for access to various forms of contraception and teaching comprehensive sex ed to try to limit the necessity of women have to get abortions.

The other side said "NO!" and opposed contraceptives and sex-ed while still also opposing abortion (the inevitable social consequence when the first two things are not applied). They want to have their cake and eat it too.


Oh and this is another reason.  Anyone that disagrees with me on this must disagree with me on all things.  You'll get a lot farther into the conversation if you stop bludgeoning people with your preconceived notions about them.
 
2014-01-22 06:56:56 PM  

jso2897: That Guy Jeff: FlashHarry: here's to 4+ decades of empowering progressive women and enraging conservative men.

I'm strictly "pro-choice". But I also despise this inability of people to correctly frame their opponent's arguments and their persistence in misrepresenting their "enemies" motives for their own sides gain.

The conservative dislike of abortion has absolutely nothing to do with women. They believe that abortion is killing a human being. They believe it is morally wrong to kill another human being, at least, one that hasn't themselves killed someone. And that's it. That's the sum and the total of their argument. All this "war against women" garbage might make for good fundraising and mobilization and help to get people riled up, but it also makes YOU every bit as sleazy as any other sleazy manipulative liar engaged in the fight. It's every bit as underhanded and disingenuous to say "liberals want to murder babies" as it is to say "conservatives want to control women". That simply isn't either sides motivation.

Here, in case this needs explicit spelling out: One side believes abortion is killing a human being. The other side believes prohibiting abortion unjustly limits the ability of women to control their own bodies. That's it. That's the entirety of the "debate". We would be a lot farther along in a lot more issues if people would stop making up the other side's motivations to capitalize on divisiveness.

Why even care what people's motivations are? I don't care. You want to claim posession my body because you think killing a fetus is murder? I decline to discuss it with you. Your motivations are irrelevant, and I will treat you the same as I would a rapist in an alley who attempts to take posession of my body.*
I agree with you - the "motivation" talk is bullshiat.

* Assuming, for the sake of argument, that I am a woman.


Because you live in a democracy? Again, you're putting words in their mouth. They don't give a flying fark about your body, and they don't want possession of it. All they care about is that you do not murder anyone. That's it.

I actually know some people who are non-religious, non-conservative, and anti-abortion. Their argument is this: there's no reasonable definition of life that applies to a baby that doesn't also apply to a fetus. That means it's every bit as wrong to kill a baby as it is to kill a fetus. There are plenty of places in society where we make tradeoffs in rights for the safety and lives of other people. A woman's right to "control her body" doesn't trump a baby, or fetus', right to live. It is a right, it does exist, it's just overruled by an even more fundamental right.

And you know what? It's compelling argument. I don't happen to subscribe to it, but that's mostly because I don't subscribe to the whole "trading rights to protect the safety and lives of others" argument. But that's definitely not the liberal worldview.
 
2014-01-22 06:57:22 PM  

the_vegetarian_cannibal: genner: hardinparamedic: genner: There's this thing called the vernacular it defines murder as the taking of a human life without just cause.

The just cause is whatever that woman says it is, below the age of awareness and viability.

Your personal discomfort with that fact is not legal jurisdiction to control the bodies of others. Sorry. Not yours.

Your right to swing your fist ends where my face begins. If the government can tell me not to beat someone to death with my own fists why can't they tell a woman not to kill a baby with her body?

What are you going to do? Arrest the pregnant teenager for murder and lock her up for life?


That kind of law is already on the books.  She could be charged with the same crime someone who kicked her in the stomach and caused a miscarriage would.
 
2014-01-22 06:57:29 PM  

InterruptingQuirk: Wadded Beef: umad: Wadded Beef: umad: Al!: As a man who recently conceived a child intentionally with a woman who wanted to have my baby, who then dumped me and aborted my child: Fark you RvW, and Fark everyone who says a man should have no say in the matter.

Men shouldn't have a choice in whether or not the woman aborts. They should have the choice to abort their parental rights and responsibilities though.

If it's the man's kid, it's his kid. They now have parental responsibilities whether they want them or not.

If women can terminate their responsibilites then men should be able to as well. If men can't, then neither should women. I don't care either way, as long as it is equal.

But it's not equal. It's only the women who are forced to carry the meatsacks and should of course have the choice whether to keep it.

As for men, if you've impregnated somebody, guess what: you've already made the choice available to you and that is you unzipped your pants. And you've made the de facto acceptance to the consequences. If she chooses to keep it you're on the hook.

Party responsibly.

That's an unequal sharing of the responsibility. They both unzipped their pants as you put it. And yet she gets a followup opportunity to discard the responsibility, while he does not because as you say, he made his choice(the only one he gets)same as she did, but that's it for him.


To take it out of the abstract into the practical. let us say, for the sake of argument, that you are ina  relationship with a woman who says she wants to make babby with you, and you do, and then she chnages her mind. Assuming you have the option to force her to carry it to term and become a mother against her will - is that a wise decision? Seems like a man with any sense would consider himself well out of a bad place.
 
2014-01-22 06:58:01 PM  

genner: hardinparamedic: genner: There's this thing called the vernacular it defines murder as the taking of a human life without just cause.

The just cause is whatever that woman says it is, below the age of awareness and viability.

Your personal discomfort with that fact is not legal jurisdiction to control the bodies of others. Sorry. Not yours.

Your right to swing your fist ends where my face begins. If the government can tell me not to beat someone to death with my own fists why can't they tell a woman not to kill a baby with her body?


Because, among other things, saying "Stop, don't do that!" doesn't halt the spontanious abortions (as opposed to the clinic type) that occur far more commonly.

Approximately half of all fertilized eggs die before a woman even knows she is pregnant.  After they do know, the spontanious rate is around 20%.


Laws against abortion won't stop that, but, due to the ignorance of biology of (largely) male, Republican elected officials, it may be criminalized in certain circumstances.
 
Displayed 50 of 452 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report