Oh. You’re one of those.
Nevermind.
For someone talking about a backpedaling…
[QUOTE=You, you fuckwit]
Yeah, yeah, another pitting of a pro-life poster based entirely on quoting his pro-life positions. Nothing in the pitting even so much as acknowledging the belief that a fetus is a living human being. Of course, by recognizing such a thing, your entire position goes to shit, so naturally you dodge it.
[/QUOTE]
Whoops. See, this is what I was talking about. You reflexively rushed to defend Hector apparently without reading what we were bitching about. It wasn’t just “he’s pro-life”. It’s that he compares abortion to slavery and doesn’t want women to vote. Oh, and way to completely ignore my point about political affiliations on your way to slam someone for applying knowledge from their own life. For what it’s worth, my experience is the same - every single person I know who is ardently pro-“life” is also against welfare, food stamps, education spending, and basically everything else the government can do to help a single, unprepared mother.
Again, horseshit. “Abortion is worse that slavery” is a common pro-life position. It’s a direct consequent of recognizing it as the murder of millions of innocent lives. It’s not extreme, it’s not novel, it’s mundane. Of course murdering millions is worse than enslaving millions.
The OP’s oh-so-clever response to this was “Hector thinks slavery (you know, the thing that happened to an entire group of real live people, systematically, for far too long) is the lesser of what he deems two evils. Ooooookay.” To another comment, the OP says “this speaks for itself.” Not a rebuttal in the least. Not a word about why that’s a silly statement. Not even so much as a snarky jab. Just what amounts to “Look at what he said and make up your own reply.”
You (and others) of course can’t see that because you’re so embedded in your ideology that you act as if your rebuttal writes itself. It doesn’t. It’s exactly what I’m talking about when I said “Look at this pro-life person! He’s clearly not pro-choice! How dare he!”
Shitty, shitty postings by shitty, shitty posters.
Bwahahahahaha! I swear, I’ve taken shits that are more accurate, coherent and intelligent than you. Dear God, what a fucking tool.
So… pro-lifers are commonly full of shit? I mean, yeah, I suppose if you believe that trees are actually humans brought back to life, then the logging industry is worse than slavery too. Even PETA usually has the self-awareness to realize that its stance is extreme and not make comparisons between things people generally accept as morally tolerable and fucking slavery. But even that analogy fails, because we never enslaved millions of people on the basis of “It lives within my fucking body and I don’t want it there”. See, there’s the thing. even if you accept that a fetus is a human being capable of the same emotions and thoughts as the re-
Why the fuck am I repeating myself? I explained this to you upthread already, as have numerous other people. Even if a fetus is to be treated as a human being, it doesn’t make abortion murder! The comparison is so utterly ridiculous as to be not even worth considering! If that’s a typical pro-life stance, then the typical pro-lifer is a fucking moron!
Things we’ve learned today: Chessic is not Hector, but the margins are slimmer than I thought they’d be.
If the anti-abortion crowd finds out that a woman who had an abortion has any psychological problems any time in her life, they attribute it to that abortion. In his book (mentioned above) Randy Alcorn said that a woman’s mental breakdown 10 years after her abortion was "abortion-related.
Since one of woman’s biggest fears is breast cancer and the rates of breast cancer have been rising since abortion became legal, of course it’s caused by abortion! Not by early detection and breast self-examinations!
Yep, abortion causes infertility. And that’s why woman use it for birth control, having numerous abortions and then having children later.
The main difference between the pro-choice crowd and the anti-abortion crowd is that the former thinks a woman should have a right to abort something that is using her body without her permission; the latter thinks that little fact makes no difference.
The main difference between the two crowds is that the former think that if you make enough noise about the “using her body without her permission” angle, everyone will overlook the minor consideration about not wanting something to be born and being stuck with looking after it, and the latter is well aware of what you are trying to throw out with the bathwater.
Any group of people who can refer to pregnancy as an inconvenience doesn’t give a shit about much of anything other than sticking it to the uppity women. Far too many anti-abortionists are indeed obsessed with the “innocent” fetus and the “guilty” woman. They think the guilty woman should be punished instead of the innocent fetus. Because the fetus is what matters to them and very little else.
The motivations should not matter. Someone can allow or choose not to allow their body to be used for the benefit of another for a variety of reasons, including the desire not to be “stuck with looking after” a baby.
In fact, I think some of those reasons might be morally wrong. But it’s none of my business what decisions other people make about their own body, nor is it the business of anyone but the woman making the choice and her doctor.
Jumping off of what Lavender says, what I often find disingenuous to say the least is when pro-lifers claim that pro-choice people are downplaying whether or not that’s a baby before it’s sentient. Yet they turn around and say that the reasons women abort are because they’re inconvenienced, they’re too lazy to be on birth control, they don’t want to interrupt X (their partying lifestyle / career / figure / whatever), they hate children, they’re immoral, etc. You typically (warning: this is an anecdote from my own personal life and only an observation of what I, faithfool, have experienced, so please do not extrapolate it out to include all peoples, everywhere – thank you) never hear them explain that the woman had it because she’s in an abusive relationship, she’s so dirt poor she can’t already feed her four kids, it would be so medically problematic, she can’t afford it or it would kill her, her mental health can’t even make it through the pregnancy. I wonder why that is, that we’re being the ones to be less than truthful, but they’re just telling it like it is(n’t)?
It’s lots of people’s business what I decide to do with my own body, for the general betterment of everyone - all that’s going on here is special pleading because it’s a uterus that’s involved and not some other bodily part. But I’m happy not to continue posting to this thread, because no-one ever changed anyone’s mind on this and everyone in this thread already knows that.
Actually, that last part is demonstrably false and I offer myself as an example. I used to be ridiculously pro-life and now I’m staunchly pro-choice. And it’s all from having intelligent discussions about the topic. Go figure.
It has never been for the betterment of anyone to force women into pregnancies. It doesn’t work and it literally kills women. That’s not “special pleading.” That’s a recognition of reality.
Yeah, thinking it over, my own sister would have been staunchly pro-choice just on the grounds that she’d knee-jerk in favour of anything that was labelled “women’s rights”, and then she (a) got pregnant (willingly) and (b) noticed how much like a tiny human being a foetus actually looks, and kinda turned around. But I think what I mostly meant about “no-one ever changed anyone’s mind” was a yelling match like these threads invariably are.
Also an Internet friend of mine who was another knee-jerker until she reasoned that female solidarity required her to align herself with the helpless female foetuses. But the plural of anecdote, and all that.
The anti-abortion crowd pushes adoption like it’s some kind of magical la-la land where nothing ever goes wrong. I’ve heard them say “Every woman regrets an abortion. No woman regrets an adoption.”
Tell that to a woman whose child was returned, abused or killed by the adopted parents.
And we’re back to the whole innocent fetus / guilty woman shit.
What other decisions that have no effect on anyone outside of one’s body are “people’s business”?
Boy, if that ain’t a microcosm for the whole issue.
But she was still OK with aborting male fetuses? Whoa.
Once again, I’m struck by just how much zealoty male anti-abortion opponents squick me out. Duly noted, so carry on.