Jump to content

Republicans are trying to find a new term for ‘pro-life’ to stave off more electoral losses

SaysWho?

By SaysWho?
in The Political Re-Education Camp

 Share

Recommended Posts

crispy4000

crispy4000

Posted
Posted
53 minutes ago, SaysWho? said:

 

Are those "deaths" tragic, then? Is something wrong with the female body where this is commonplace and not rare?


All death of human beings is tragic on some level.  I feel stronger about intentional killing rising to another level than nature running its course.  But no, nothing wrong with the woman.

 

53 minutes ago, SaysWho? said:

But I don't think that's what he's asking. "I'm glad I wasn't aborted." "I'm glad nobody intervened in the rape." Both lead to the person being born. If I stop a rape from happening, have I then stopped a life from forming?


Stopping the rape would be the best outcome.  I don’t consider it a harm to the non-existent human to never be conceived.  Harm can only come to those who are real.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GeneticBlueprint

GeneticBlueprint

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, SaysWho? said:

 

Are those "deaths" tragic, then? Is something wrong with the female body where this is commonplace and not rare? Because an abortion pretty much does what the female body already does frequently, but we're saying she can't make that decision herself in the early stages of pregnancy.


This is what I was alluding to earlier. Tons of outrage over abortion but not a single tear shed or law written to address all the fetuses and fertilized eggs that die on their own. Almost as if it’s not about death but controlling women’s choices. 

  • Halal 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Massdriver

Massdriver

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, crispy4000 said:

 

It’s a simple premise, and a good one to generally operate from.  But it’s clearly not an absolute.  Where we cross the boundary to saying killing other humans is okay in select contexts should take solid arguments.  It’s either that, or we just shouldn’t treat any human life as important.

 

I personally don’t think the arguments used to justify abortion from a developmental, cognitive or experiential angle hold up to scrutiny when tested.  Why that particular boundary and not another?  Is it because we have our own biases towards what we are at present?  What does that say about humans not able like us?

I don’t find your genetic angle convincing and it hasn’t held up to basic logic. 
 

You must have been bored to argue for your pro life position itt. :p
 

Edit: If what makes a human being have moral worth is our genetic sequence, then animals have no value at all, nor would any other homo genus if they were alive. Torturing dogs and cats is fine.  Abusing all animals is fine. It would was perfectly cool to enslave and rape Neanderthals. If an intelligent alien race were encountered, we can do whatever we want because they don’t have human genetics. These are the consequences to rejecting all the properties that would be more applicable to other beings, the ones you say don’t hold up to scrutiny. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kal-El814

Kal-El814

Posted
Posted
44 minutes ago, crispy4000 said:

I personally don’t think the arguments used to justify abortion from a developmental, cognitive or experiential angle hold up to scrutiny when tested.  Why that particular boundary and not another?  Is it because we have our own biases towards what we are at present?  What does that say about humans not able like us?

 

I wanna preface what I'm about to say with the notion that I know people who have raised children with severe developmental disabilities or conditions that will challenge them throughout their lives, shorten their lives, etc. I know from my own conversations with them that my word choice is sometimes imperfect and my intent / feelings don't come off the right way. I do not think people in those circumstances have lives with value that is any different than anyone else's.

 

But to get back to my previous point, it is simply not realistic to expect that everyone engaging in sexual activity even if it is done with the intent to start a pregnancy, is capable of accounting for every possible developmental outcome. It is not reasonable to expect that someone who realizes they are pregnant with circumstances that will not allow them to raise that child to carry it to term, birth it, and put it up for adoption.

 

I appreciate that the concern here drifts into something potentially adjacent to eugenics, but I do not think it does that any more than non-abortion solutions to the same problem, which would be doing things to ensure that only people with means, people less likely to encounter those developmental issues, etc., are the ones having children. 

  • Like 1
  • Halal 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
legend

legend

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, crispy4000 said:

It’s a simple premise, and a good one to generally operate from.  But it’s clearly not an absolute.  Where we cross the boundary to saying killing other humans is okay in select contexts should take solid arguments.  It’s either that, or we just shouldn’t treat any human life as important.

 

It's fine to have heuristics in life. But then you need to acknowledge them as heuristics and you absolutely shouldn't base an argument for a position by abusively applying the heuristic well beyond edge cases by equivocating with terms.

 

You say you're open the arguments against why otherwise, which sounds great, except there are mountains of text out there on all the terrible consequences of not allowing abortion. I can't imagine you've never heard them, yet you still cling to this overly simplistic badly applied heuristic all the same.

 

4 hours ago, crispy4000 said:

I personally don’t think the arguments used to justify abortion from a developmental, cognitive or experiential angle hold up to scrutiny when tested.  Why that particular boundary and not another? Is it because we have our own biases towards what we are at present?

 

Sharp decision boundaries do not imply sharp value differences. Suppose I have two investment options. Choice A will yield $100 in a year and choice B will yield $101. There is a very clear sharp decision boundary about which to prefer: choice B. That there is a sharp decision boundary doesn't mean the value differences are sharp because it's only a $1 difference. And if choice A's return rises to $101.01 the best choice will "suddenly" switch to choice A, but they are still roughly equal in value and I'm not going to lose sleep over choosing the wrong one.

 

W.r.t. abortion, if someone has an abortion 1 day after where I would draw the line due to cognitive development, that doesn't make the abortion somehow totally horrible in comparison to 1 day earlier, because the value difference can smoothly change even though the preference switches and I most certainly wouldn't seek punishment for anyone involved because of that.

 

Similarly, other contexts and costs also factor in on where someone would draw that line. Most pro-choice advocates do have a line where they don't think it's proper to always allow abortion, but then will still make exceptions quite late into pregnancy if the mother's life is at risk and doubly so when the mother's life is at risk and child is not expected to live. The fact that situations are messy like this is also a good reason for the government to minimize their involvement in disallowing it, possibly not being involved at all.

 

 

Quote

What does that say about humans not able like us?

 

Nothing at all. The cognitive difference between less abled fully developed people and a fetus is fucking staggering. It's weird and maybe even insulting to less abled people to even bring that up as a comparison.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jwheel86

Jwheel86

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, crispy4000 said:

It’s a simple premise, and a good one to generally operate from.  But it’s clearly not an absolute.  Where we cross the boundary to saying killing other humans is okay in select contexts should take solid arguments.  It’s either that, or we just shouldn’t treat any human life as important.

 

 

I would contend that society actually doesn't care about human life at any stage and that abortion is an easy way to fake caring. You can say pro lifers care about other issues like healthcare, but they put zero energy into it. Instead they focus on the most controversial stage of "life" where there will never be broad agreement. Imagine if the Christian Right put that same energy into healthcare reform, or the child welfare system, or disability services, etc and etc, an area where they could get broad agreement and make progress to save lives. 

  • Like 6
  • True 1
  • Halal 1
  • Hugs 1
  • Hype 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CastlevaniaNut18

CastlevaniaNut18

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Jwheel86 said:

 

I would contend that society actually doesn't care about human life at any stage and that abortion is an easy way to fake caring. You can say pro lifers care about other issues like healthcare, but they put zero energy into it. Instead they focus on the most controversial stage of "life" where there will never be broad agreement. Imagine if the Christian Right put that same energy into healthcare reform, or the child welfare system, or disability services, etc and etc, an area where they could get broad agreement and make progress to save lives. 

I stole this quote  because it just really hit me hard. Hope that's okay.

 

Imagine indeed.

  • Like 1
  • Hugs 1
  • Hype 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jwheel86

Jwheel86

Posted
Posted
57 minutes ago, legend said:

Similarly, other contexts and costs also factor in on where someone would draw that line. Most pro-choice advocates do have a line where they don't think it's proper to always allow abortion, but then will still make exceptions quite late into pregnancy if the mother's life is at risk and doubly so when the mother's life is at risk and child is not expected to live. The fact that situations are messy like this is also a good reason for the government to minimize their involvement in disallowing it, possibly not being involved at all.

 

 

Also attempts to use those personally defined lines to negotiate a compromise with the pro life movement is pointless because they'll always chase the maximalist position. Texas has a near total ban, good enough? Nope. 

 

JGEALPWXCM53VFO2BUBQXPJEJY.jpg&w=1440

Texas highways targeted by antiabortion activists seeking to block interstate travel - The Washington Post

WWW.WASHINGTONPOST.COM
A new ordinance, passed in several jurisdictions and under consideration elsewhere, aims to stop people from using local roads to drive someone out of state for an abortion

 

Quote

...make it illegal to transport anyone to get an abortion on roads within the city or county limits. The laws allow any private citizen to sue a person or organization they suspect of violating the ordinance.

 

Antiabortion advocates behind the measure are targeting regions along interstates and in areas with airports, with the goal of blocking off the main arteries out of Texas and keeping pregnant women hemmed within the confines of their antiabortion state. These provisions have already passed in two counties and two cities, creating legal risk for those traveling on major highways including Interstate 20 and Route 84, which head toward New Mexico, where abortion remains legal and new clinics have opened to accommodate Texas women. Several more jurisdictions are expected to vote on the measure in the coming weeks.

 

“This really is building a wall to stop abortion trafficking,” said Mark Lee Dickson, the antiabortion activist behind the effort.

 

  • Guillotine 1
  • Halal 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
crispy4000

crispy4000

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, Jwheel86 said:

 

I would contend that society actually doesn't care about human life at any stage and that abortion is an easy way to fake caring. You can say pro lifers care about other issues like healthcare, but they put zero energy into it. Instead they focus on the most controversial stage of "life" where there will never be broad agreement. Imagine if the Christian Right put that same energy into healthcare reform, or the child welfare system, or disability services, etc and etc, an area where they could get broad agreement and make progress to save lives. 

 

If society truly doesn't care about human life at any stage, we would not have hospitals, schools, homeless assistance, unemployment assistance, welfare, social security, etc.  I would contend that these make your first statement hyperbole. ;)


That's not to say that I think you're wrong about plenty of fake caring.  Republican politicians most particularly would rather punt the responsibility to religious organizations to pick up the slack.  Which is wrong on so many levels.  But that shouldn't diminish the work that those orgs (and secular ones) are doing at the ground level to be proactively pro-life for struggling families.  I will never write off those efforts based on mere political or religious affiliation.  Most of us haven't done shit for others in need by comparison. 
 

It's too easy today for politics online to consume our energy, where debating or grandstanding largely amounts to nothing good for anyone.  Maybe the rare times I step in here is too much.

 

But yes, let's see the healthcare/welfare/disability political narrative change on the religious right.  I'm all for it.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TUFKAK

TUFKAK

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Jwheel86 said:

 

I would contend that society actually doesn't care about human life at any stage and that abortion is an easy way to fake caring. You can say pro lifers care about other issues like healthcare, but they put zero energy into it. Instead they focus on the most controversial stage of "life" where there will never be broad agreement. Imagine if the Christian Right put that same energy into healthcare reform, or the child welfare system, or disability services, etc and etc, an area where they could get broad agreement and make progress to save lives. 

That would require them to actually live for Jesus and we know they won’t.

 

This is an easy to appear righteous while being full of shit, as we’ve seen in this thread they’ve effectively moralized rape and argue that half of our population are naught but brood mares. 

  • True 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fizzzzle

Fizzzzle

Posted
Posted

It makes me glad that other people have come around to "if you are against abortion in any case, you should be against it in every case." I've been saying that for damn near a decade and I used to get flamed for it.

 

If abortion is murder, then the child being a product of rape doesn't make it any less murder. You can't just say "murder is okay if the mother was raped." That fucking fetus didn't rape anyone.

 

"Abortion is wrong because fetuses are people... unless their mother was raped, then let me introduce our little friend to Mount Taygetus." *yeet*

 

Get the fuck out of here with that shit. People get uncomfortable when confronted with the logical conclusion of being "pro-life." That should tell you all you need to know. One side says "abortion is something that should be decided by every woman on a case by case basis," the other says "ALL ABORTION IS WRONG... except when it isn't..."

  • True 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TUFKAK

TUFKAK

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Ominous said:

Accessible prenatal healthcare? Nah. 

Accessible postnatal healthcare? Nah. 

Accessible mental healthcare? Nah.

Protecting the air and water vital to life? Nah.

Access to food for children? Nah.

Forcing a woman to stay pregnant? Yeahhhhhhhh life is precious. Lord Of The Rings Bridezilla GIF by Max

 

And truthfully I say onto you, the fetuses are precious for they shall inherit my kingdom. The rest of you can get rekt!

 

RepublicanJesus 6:14

Link to comment
Share on other sites
legend

legend

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, Fizzzzle said:

It makes me glad that other people have come around to "if you are against abortion in any case, you should be against it in every case." I've been saying that for damn near a decade and I used to get flamed for it.

 

If abortion is murder, then the child being a product of rape doesn't make it any less murder. You can't just say "murder is okay if the mother was raped." That fucking fetus didn't rape anyone.

 

"Abortion is wrong because fetuses are people... unless their mother was raped, then let me introduce our little friend to Mount Taygetus." *yeet*

 

Get the fuck out of here with that shit. People get uncomfortable when confronted with the logical conclusion of being "pro-life." That should tell you all you need to know. One side says "abortion is something that should be decided by every woman on a case by case basis," the other says "ALL ABORTION IS WRONG... except when it isn't..."

 

 

That doesn't follow unless you think you must govern decisions by absolute rules devoid of context and arbitrarily dictated. Which yes, many "moral" systems aim for, in which case see my previous comment on the cancer of a term that is "morality" and how it makes everyone stop thinking :p 

 

"Murder" as a term is useful as a legal construct for dictating large-scale social policy, but that's it. The underlying issue here is you're killing something, and yes, killing something, even fully developed people (of which fetuses most certainly are not), is sometimes appropriate depending on the context. To not consider context and all the impacts of a decision is madness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MarSolo

MarSolo

Posted
Posted

I haven’t read this entire thread, but did no one here not end this argument by quoting Carlin?

 

Quote

“Pro-life conservatives are obsessed with the fetus from conception to 9 months. After that, they don’t wanna know about you. They don’t wanna hear from you. No nothing! No neonatal care, no daycare, no Head Start, no school lunch, no food stamps, no welfare, no nothing. If you’re pre-born, you’re fine, if you’re preschool, you’re fucked.”

 

  • Halal 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...