Impressed by Trump administration
-
O-Trap
This is drastic hyperbole, which really doesn't belong in a discussion where one wishes to side with academia. I agree with your ultimate position. I merely pointed out that you were using a faulty comparison in your effort to make a point.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.
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.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".
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).
If the fetus survives an abortion, I would imagine that it should be neglect of a child resulting in substantial physical harm, which is, I believe the most serious charge that can be leveled against a parent whose child dies as the result of neglect, but does not die by injuries inflicted by the parent (ie, abuse).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/
It's a misdemeanor. -
sleeper
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.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.
Repeat after me, THIS ISN'T THE 1500'S, WOMEN ARE PEOPLE AND THEY HAVE RIGHTS. -
CenterBHSFan
This discussion probably deserves it's own thread. Abortion has nothing to do with being impressed by Trump/administration. -
O-Trap
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;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. -
sleeper
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. LOLWell, 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). -
sleeper
Well considering Trump signed an EO preventing organizations from discussing abortion and he nominated a redneck SCOTUS who is against Roe vs. Wade, I'd say this has a lot to do with the 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
It seems like this train always makes the station in most political threads if they go long enough.CenterBHSFan;1848294 wrote:This discussion probably deserves it's own thread. Abortion has nothing to do with being impressed by Trump/administration. -
sleeper
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.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.
Sad! -
O-Trap
Who cares about the pope? There are over twice as many professed Protestants in the United States as there are Catholics (2014 numbers), and Protestants generally don't give a shit about the pope. LOLsleeper;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 -
O-Trap
That's fine. So stop making them look good.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! -
sleeper
I'm making myself look good using logic and reason.O-Trap;1848304 wrote:That's fine. So stop making them look good.
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
If you think hyperbole, red herrings, and false comparisons are logic and reason, perhaps you don't actually know what those words mean.sleeper;1848306 wrote:I'm making myself look good using logic and reason.
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;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. -
sleeper
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.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.
I know better. They are a waste of space and the only hope is that they don't vote before they no longer exist. Let me be clear, these people are human garbage and deserve nothing. -
CenterBHSFan
Maybe some Thorazine?
-
O-Trap
Whichever personality is speaking here, you should tell the one that claimed to be using logic and reason about your plan. Apparently, the two of you aren't on the same page.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. -
Con_Alma
Who said sex was only for procreation?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.
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 is 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. -
Con_Alma
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.O-Trap;1848310 wrote:...
There are far better means for arguing in support of women's rights and in opposition of banning abortion....
-
O-Trap
Well, that does appear to be what he's arguing against, so I imagine that's what he thinks you're saying.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.
It's been like watching a third-generation inbred hump a doorknob. -
QuakerOatssleeper;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.
You are conveniently forgetting about the decisions she makes prior to her decision to consult with a doctor. -
sleeper
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. This kills nothing other than a cluster of cells, a parasite, and not a human baby.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.
It's amazing that in 2017 we still have to have this conversation with grown adults. -
sleeper
Big government is okay as long as its in restrooms and bedrooms.QuakerOats;1848323 wrote:You are conveniently forgetting about the decisions she makes prior to her decision to consult with a doctor.
Signed,
Republicans in 2017 -
sleeper
You have clearly stated that you believe abortion should be illegal.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.
I guess with Trump elected, we need to start asking Republicans what they mean when they say words. -
Con_Alma
...of which the function is to control the birth. ...and we have come full circle.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. ... -
sleeper
As a last resort. It's not a first option for anyone or very few.Con_Alma;1848327 wrote:...of which the function is to control the birth. ...and we have come full circle.
Glad we have come full circle and you agree women are equals and deserve to be respected for more than a cluster of cells residing in their body.
