sleeper;1848222 wrote:Good. Then expect plenty of "miscarriages" to take place if abortion is ever outlawed. That's how it was pre-Roe V. Wade; lots of women having "miscarriages" usually at their own demise so Republicans can jerk off to controlling women and their individual bodies.

sleeper;1848222 wrote:Say it with me now, Misogyny; the Republican way. Just like being "Pro-life" but fuck that baby once it's born and shaming single mothers for not choosing "god" or whatever else bullshit they believe in the name of "personal responsibility".

Con_Alma;1848241 wrote:Should it be considered involuntary manslaughter if a child survives an abortion and id then left to die? That one's a little more difficult for me to wrap my head around. DO medical workers who have taken the Hippocratic oath have a responsibility to assist the child at that point?

http://www.liveaction.org/news/babies-left-die-survive-abortion/

jmog;1848290 wrote:This is such a strawman fallacy mixed with so many other illogical statements it's hard to know where to begin.

I could make an equally stupid statement "Then you should support safe and legal robberies. Otherwise you are forcing robbers, who are people, to go to jail against their will."

Robbing someone is a choice that has possible, sometimes probable, consequences no matter how hard someone may try to prevent those consequences.

Having sex with someone is a choice that has possible, sometimes probable, consequences no matter how hard someone may try to prevent those consequences.

"Forcing" someone to deal with consequences of their own choices is not inhuman, it is life and reality.

sleeper;1848292 wrote:Right, because sex is only for procreation. If conception happens, there is a another way to prevent birth and that's called abortion which is legal. I guess you would prefer to go back to pre-Roe v Wade where women would have back alley abortions and die during it. That's what you want and that's what Republicans want. Absolute horror.

Repeat after me, THIS ISN'T THE 1500'S, WOMEN ARE PEOPLE AND THEY HAVE RIGHTS.

Well, there are a fair number of people who believe in personal responsibility who do not believe in God. In the same way, there are plenty who believe in God who don't place much importance on self-reliance. You're linking two things that are not logically linked, necessarily.

As for those wishing to prohibit abortion being misogynists, I think it's probably equally condemnatory, but I'm not sure it's driven by misogyny (though, to be fair, it would certainly seem to perpetuate a misogynistic culture to a degree).

CenterBHSFan;1848294 wrote:This discussion probably deserves it's own thread. Abortion has nothing to do with being impressed by Trump/administration.

CenterBHSFan;1848294 wrote:This discussion probably deserves it's own thread. Abortion has nothing to do with being impressed by Trump/administration.

O-Trap;1848296 wrote:Good lord, sleeper. I'm even on the same side of the position as you, but you're shitting the bed trying to defend it, and you're making it look bad.

sleeper;1848297 wrote:And having an abortion is often time the personally responsible choice. Sorry Republicans think the Pope is a doctor and can define when life begins. LOL

sleeper;1848301 wrote:It's impossible to have reasonable debate with redneck backwards bible thumpers who think the Pope is an authority of life, from a religion that is 100% made up. These people are brainwashed, getting propaganda from the church on Sundays and propaganda from Fox News the rest of the week.

Sad!

O-Trap;1848304 wrote:That's fine. So stop making them look good.

sleeper;1848306 wrote:I'm making myself look good using logic and reason.

sleeper;1848306 wrote:They believe that women are second class citizens who only should procreate and have no control over their own body. That's the Republican wet dream.

O-Trap;1848310 wrote:If you think hyperbole, red herrings, and false comparisons are logic and reason, perhaps you don't actually know what those words mean.

There are far better means for arguing in support of women's rights and in opposition of banning abortion. As far as I'm aware, they're the best arguments in the whole conversation. Hyperbole, red herrings, and false comparisons are not among them.



See above.

sleeper;1848312 wrote:You clearly aren't listening. I'm not going to put any intellectual effort on those who believe women are second class citizens. I'm not going to waste effort convincing those that believe the Bible is 100% real and God exists with no proof that women deserve equal rights.

sleeper;1848292 wrote:Right, because sex is only for procreation. If conception happens, there is a another way to prevent birth and that's called abortion which is legal. I guess you would prefer to go back to pre-Roe v Wade where women would have back alley abortions and die during it. That's what you want and that's what Republicans want. Absolute horror.

Repeat after me, THIS ISN'T THE 1500'S, WOMEN ARE PEOPLE AND THEY HAVE RIGHTS.

O-Trap;1848310 wrote:...

There are far better means for arguing in support of women's rights and in opposition of banning abortion....

Con_Alma;1848320 wrote:My goodness, if Sleeper thinks I have argued against women's rights and for banning abortion then he hasn't read my posts very well.

sleeper;1848268 wrote:The only thing that's said is your insistence on BIG GOVERNMENT interfering with the decisions made between a woman and her doctor.

Con_Alma;1848319 wrote:Who said sex was only for procreation?

It is important however, to understand that there's always a possibility in sex resulting in conception.

Yes, abortion is legal....and I expect it to remain legal.....and it's function ultimately birth control. That's the point.

I don't think we should go back to pre-Roe v Wade. That's not what I want at all.

I agree that it's not the 1500s. of course women have rights. The have the right to have an abortion if they so choose. I haven't stated otherwise.

QuakerOats;1848323 wrote:You are conveniently forgetting about the decisions she makes prior to her decision to consult with a doctor.

Con_Alma;1848320 wrote:My goodness, if Sleeper thinks I have argued against women's rights and for banning abortion then he hasn't read my posts very well.

sleeper;1848324 wrote:It is also important to understand that should other forms of birth control fail, that the woman has a legal right to a safe abortion. ...

Con_Alma;1848327 wrote:...of which the function is to control the birth. ...and we have come full circle.